Discussion:
How to get to Hesthrow
(too old to reply)
Recliner
2022-04-22 21:12:09 UTC
Permalink
I’m due to fly out of Heathrow in June. Arrival in London will be at St
Pancras. Assuming the Elizabeth Line is running through the core, what’s
the best connection from StP? Trot downstairs and get a Thameslink heading
to Farringdon?
That sounds a good way to do it. If the Liz Line isn't running, I suppose
it's Met/Circle Line round to Paddington and pick up the Heathrow Express
there.
It's much easier, much cheaper, and probably no slower, to just take a
direct Piccadilly train to any Heathrow terminal. Step-free all the way,
and the seats are more comfortable.
Have they sorted out the godawful mess they made of the signage to the
Thameslink platforms at St Pancras. When it first opened, I went to
investigate while I was in London and all the signs said "Govia" instead of
"Thameslink".
Don't blame Govia, which was the company that promptly sorted out the
naming mess as soon as it took over, more than seven years ago. Blame
FirstGroup, which foisted the awful FCC name on Thameslink.

<https://flickr.com/photos/recliner/17087374661/in/album-72157651787464546/>
Whose brilliant idea was it to replace a well-known name
Thameslink with the here-today-gone-tomorrow name of the current company
that operated the service.
FirstGroup

I asked one of the railway staff "which way to
the Thameslink platforms" and he said in a weary "I'm fed up of having to
keep telling people" voice "Look for signs saying Govia".
Definitely not.

Again, you are the one in the wrong. Govia is the company that fixed the
problem, and should be praised, not unfairly blamed. And it it's never used
Govia branding on any of its trains. Thameslink has never been called
Govia.
Tweed
2022-04-23 05:54:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
I’m due to fly out of Heathrow in June. Arrival in London will be at St
Pancras. Assuming the Elizabeth Line is running through the core, what’s
the best connection from StP? Trot downstairs and get a Thameslink heading
to Farringdon?
That sounds a good way to do it. If the Liz Line isn't running, I suppose
it's Met/Circle Line round to Paddington and pick up the Heathrow Express
there.
It's much easier, much cheaper, and probably no slower, to just take a
direct Piccadilly train to any Heathrow terminal. Step-free all the way,
and the seats are more comfortable.
Have they sorted out the godawful mess they made of the signage to the
Thameslink platforms at St Pancras. When it first opened, I went to
investigate while I was in London and all the signs said "Govia" instead of
"Thameslink".
Don't blame Govia, which was the company that promptly sorted out the
naming mess as soon as it took over, more than seven years ago. Blame
FirstGroup, which foisted the awful FCC name on Thameslink.
<https://flickr.com/photos/recliner/17087374661/in/album-72157651787464546/>
Whose brilliant idea was it to replace a well-known name
Thameslink with the here-today-gone-tomorrow name of the current company
that operated the service.
FirstGroup
I asked one of the railway staff "which way to
the Thameslink platforms" and he said in a weary "I'm fed up of having to
keep telling people" voice "Look for signs saying Govia".
Definitely not.
Again, you are the one in the wrong. Govia is the company that fixed the
problem, and should be praised, not unfairly blamed. And it it's never used
Govia branding on any of its trains. Thameslink has never been called
Govia.
I hadn’t realised until just after my original post that EL/Crossrail was
going to initially open with an enforced change at Paddington.

In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.

Anyway, back to the original question, once EL is running as ultimately
intended I wonder what the intended routing is from StP to Heathrow.
Recliner
2022-04-23 06:16:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
I’m due to fly out of Heathrow in June. Arrival in London will be at St
Pancras. Assuming the Elizabeth Line is running through the core, what’s
the best connection from StP? Trot downstairs and get a Thameslink heading
to Farringdon?
That sounds a good way to do it. If the Liz Line isn't running, I suppose
it's Met/Circle Line round to Paddington and pick up the Heathrow Express
there.
It's much easier, much cheaper, and probably no slower, to just take a
direct Piccadilly train to any Heathrow terminal. Step-free all the way,
and the seats are more comfortable.
Have they sorted out the godawful mess they made of the signage to the
Thameslink platforms at St Pancras. When it first opened, I went to
investigate while I was in London and all the signs said "Govia" instead of
"Thameslink".
Don't blame Govia, which was the company that promptly sorted out the
naming mess as soon as it took over, more than seven years ago. Blame
FirstGroup, which foisted the awful FCC name on Thameslink.
<https://flickr.com/photos/recliner/17087374661/in/album-72157651787464546/>
Whose brilliant idea was it to replace a well-known name
Thameslink with the here-today-gone-tomorrow name of the current company
that operated the service.
FirstGroup
I asked one of the railway staff "which way to
the Thameslink platforms" and he said in a weary "I'm fed up of having to
keep telling people" voice "Look for signs saying Govia".
Definitely not.
Again, you are the one in the wrong. Govia is the company that fixed the
problem, and should be praised, not unfairly blamed. And it it's never used
Govia branding on any of its trains. Thameslink has never been called
Govia.
I hadn’t realised until just after my original post that EL/Crossrail was
going to initially open with an enforced change at Paddington.
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
Post by Tweed
Anyway, back to the original question, once EL is running as ultimately
intended I wonder what the intended routing is from StP to Heathrow.
I'm not sure whether it would be better to go east and change at Farringon,
or west and change at Paddington. The time won't be much different.
Changing at Paddington also gives you the option of using either Hex or
Liz.
John Levine
2022-04-23 18:46:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to all open terminals?

I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
--
Regards,
John Levine, ***@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
Recliner
2022-04-23 19:18:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
Roland Perry
2022-04-23 19:30:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
--
Roland Perry
Tweed
2022-04-23 20:25:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
Roland Perry
2022-04-24 05:53:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tweed
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
It's the constant starting and stopping that's most wearing I think.

I like people-watching, and how the crown thins out leaving mainly
longhaul passengers, and wondering where they might be going, and why
the are dressed like *that*.

Touch wood, on the return trip it's also just as reliable (HEx is rather
granular, and connection to the subsurface trains at Paddington is a bit
of a lottery) so you know exactly which onward train you will be
expecting to catch.
--
Roland Perry
Anna Noyd-Dryver
2022-04-24 06:38:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Tweed
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
It's the constant starting and stopping that's most wearing I think.
I like people-watching, and how the crown thins out leaving mainly
longhaul passengers, and wondering where they might be going, and why
the are dressed like *that*.
Touch wood, on the return trip it's also just as reliable (HEx is rather
granular,
I thought every 15 minutes was considered the general baseline for 'turn up
and go' operation?

Lizzie will eventually be every 10 mins, IIRC.
Post by Roland Perry
and connection to the subsurface trains at Paddington is a bit
of a lottery)
Every 5/6 minutes not good enough for you?


Anna Noyd-Dryver
Roland Perry
2022-04-24 10:24:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Tweed
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
It's the constant starting and stopping that's most wearing I think.
I like people-watching, and how the crown thins out leaving mainly
longhaul passengers, and wondering where they might be going, and why
the are dressed like *that*.
Touch wood, on the return trip it's also just as reliable (HEx is rather
granular,
I thought every 15 minutes was considered the general baseline for 'turn up
and go' operation?
For heavy rail (and subsurface TfL) outside the North/South circulars,
on a one-leg trip, perhaps. Yes, I know HEx is outside that perimeter,
but it has competition if the destination is beyond Paddington.

A change at somewhere like Paddington means concatenating the
granularity of two different services.
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Lizzie will eventually be every 10 mins, IIRC.
Post by Roland Perry
and connection to the subsurface trains at Paddington is a bit
of a lottery)
Every 5/6 minutes not good enough for you?
HEx arrivals at Paddington intuitively head towards the Praed St
station, where the Circle Line has for a generation been the epitome of
lateness/unreliability. Or get a District Line and change at Edgware
Road, where the lack of a step-free transfer is an ongoing scandal.

And now we have the "teacup", even Circle Line trains require such a
change.

Alternatively, use the H&C station, which has always been a bit of an
afterthought, and iirx after a rebuild is even further from the heavy
rail platforms. And is that step-free from the main shed yet?
--
Roland Perry
Anna Noyd-Dryver
2022-04-24 18:03:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Tweed
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
It's the constant starting and stopping that's most wearing I think.
I like people-watching, and how the crown thins out leaving mainly
longhaul passengers, and wondering where they might be going, and why
the are dressed like *that*.
Touch wood, on the return trip it's also just as reliable (HEx is rather
granular,
I thought every 15 minutes was considered the general baseline for 'turn up
and go' operation?
For heavy rail (and subsurface TfL) outside the North/South circulars,
on a one-leg trip, perhaps. Yes, I know HEx is outside that perimeter,
but it has competition if the destination is beyond Paddington.
A change at somewhere like Paddington means concatenating the
granularity of two different services.
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Lizzie will eventually be every 10 mins, IIRC.
Post by Roland Perry
and connection to the subsurface trains at Paddington is a bit
of a lottery)
Every 5/6 minutes not good enough for you?
HEx arrivals at Paddington intuitively head towards the Praed St
station,
Declining to use HEx because some people haven't caught up with a network
change 13 years ago, is like telling people not to use Eurostar because
they no longer run to Waterloo!
Post by Roland Perry
where the Circle Line has for a generation been the epitome of
lateness/unreliability. Or get a District Line and change at Edgware
Road, where the lack of a step-free transfer is an ongoing scandal.
And now we have the "teacup", even Circle Line trains require such a
change.
So go to the correct platform then. H&C, Circle and District frequencies
combine to provide a train every 5/6 minutes on each. They have to have
matching frequencies to make the service across Praed Street Junction and
into Edgware Road's four platforms, work.
Post by Roland Perry
Alternatively, use the H&C station, which has always been a bit of an
afterthought, and iirx after a rebuild is even further from the heavy
rail platforms. And is that step-free from the main shed yet?
It's a wider route the whole way, far easier to navigate, and yes step-free
throughout. Though admittedly not directly from the HEx platforms to the
footbridge, you need to go via either platform 1 or 12 (or three steps only
via 8/9).


Anna Noyd-Dryver
Roland Perry
2022-04-25 09:55:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Tweed
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly.
The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
It's the constant starting and stopping that's most wearing I think.
I like people-watching, and how the crown thins out leaving mainly
longhaul passengers, and wondering where they might be going, and why
the are dressed like *that*.
Touch wood, on the return trip it's also just as reliable (HEx is rather
granular,
I thought every 15 minutes was considered the general baseline for 'turn up
and go' operation?
For heavy rail (and subsurface TfL) outside the North/South circulars,
on a one-leg trip, perhaps. Yes, I know HEx is outside that perimeter,
but it has competition if the destination is beyond Paddington.
A change at somewhere like Paddington means concatenating the
granularity of two different services.
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Lizzie will eventually be every 10 mins, IIRC.
Post by Roland Perry
and connection to the subsurface trains at Paddington is a bit
of a lottery)
Every 5/6 minutes not good enough for you?
HEx arrivals at Paddington intuitively head towards the Praed St
station,
Declining to use HEx because some people haven't caught up with a network
change 13 years ago, is like telling people not to use Eurostar because
they no longer run to Waterloo!
We need to bear in mind the target audience for this kind of advice.
Almost by definition they aren't familiar with the routings available,
let alone the layout of individual London terminus station.

I'd be much happier, for example, to advise a virgin traveller to seek
out HEx from the H&C platforms, rather than the other way round.

Similarly the Piccadilly/District station at Hammersmith from the H&C
and not the other way around (especially if after dark and raining).
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
where the Circle Line has for a generation been the epitome of
lateness/unreliability. Or get a District Line and change at Edgware
Road, where the lack of a step-free transfer is an ongoing scandal.
And now we have the "teacup", even Circle Line trains require such a
change.
So go to the correct platform then.
There's a subtle difference between being told what the "correct"
platform is, versus finding it in the bowels of an unfamiliar station.
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
H&C, Circle and District frequencies combine to provide a train every
5/6 minutes on each. They have to have matching frequencies to make the
service across Praed Street Junction and into Edgware Road's four
platforms, work.
Post by Roland Perry
Alternatively, use the H&C station, which has always been a bit of an
afterthought, and iirx after a rebuild is even further from the heavy
rail platforms. And is that step-free from the main shed yet?
It's a wider route the whole way, far easier to navigate, and yes step-free
throughout. Though admittedly not directly from the HEx platforms to the
footbridge,
Ah-ha!
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
you need to go via either platform 1 or 12 (or three steps only
via 8/9).
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
begun:

<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>

Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2022-04-25 16:14:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Tweed
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly.
The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all
terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
It's the constant starting and stopping that's most wearing I think.
I like people-watching, and how the crown thins out leaving mainly
longhaul passengers, and wondering where they might be going, and why
the are dressed like *that*.
Touch wood, on the return trip it's also just as reliable (HEx is rather
granular,
I thought every 15 minutes was considered the general baseline for 'turn up
and go' operation?
For heavy rail (and subsurface TfL) outside the North/South circulars,
on a one-leg trip, perhaps. Yes, I know HEx is outside that perimeter,
but it has competition if the destination is beyond Paddington.
A change at somewhere like Paddington means concatenating the
granularity of two different services.
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Lizzie will eventually be every 10 mins, IIRC.
Post by Roland Perry
and connection to the subsurface trains at Paddington is a bit
of a lottery)
Every 5/6 minutes not good enough for you?
HEx arrivals at Paddington intuitively head towards the Praed St
station,
Declining to use HEx because some people haven't caught up with a network
change 13 years ago, is like telling people not to use Eurostar because
they no longer run to Waterloo!
We need to bear in mind the target audience for this kind of advice.
Almost by definition they aren't familiar with the routings available,
let alone the layout of individual London terminus station.
I'd be much happier, for example, to advise a virgin traveller to seek
out HEx from the H&C platforms, rather than the other way round.
Similarly the Piccadilly/District station at Hammersmith from the H&C
and not the other way around (especially if after dark and raining).
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
where the Circle Line has for a generation been the epitome of
lateness/unreliability. Or get a District Line and change at Edgware
Road, where the lack of a step-free transfer is an ongoing scandal.
And now we have the "teacup", even Circle Line trains require such a
change.
So go to the correct platform then.
There's a subtle difference between being told what the "correct"
platform is, versus finding it in the bowels of an unfamiliar station.
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
H&C, Circle and District frequencies combine to provide a train every
5/6 minutes on each. They have to have matching frequencies to make the
service across Praed Street Junction and into Edgware Road's four
platforms, work.
Post by Roland Perry
Alternatively, use the H&C station, which has always been a bit of an
afterthought, and iirx after a rebuild is even further from the heavy
rail platforms. And is that step-free from the main shed yet?
It's a wider route the whole way, far easier to navigate, and yes step-free
throughout. Though admittedly not directly from the HEx platforms to the
footbridge,
Ah-ha!
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
you need to go via either platform 1 or 12 (or three steps only
via 8/9).
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
Ouch! That's a real boo-boo. It's a very long time since Paddington was
served by the Met.
Roger Lynn
2022-05-12 17:26:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road, you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street. And
in the other direction if your train terminated at Baker Street you'd get a
better selection of trains to change onto than you do at Edgware Road.
There's a similar situation with Aldgate and Tower Hill. :-(
Recliner
2022-05-12 18:48:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road, you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if the Met had
designed it differently in 1863.
Post by Roger Lynn
And in the other direction if your train terminated at Baker Street you'd get a
better selection of trains to change onto than you do at Edgware Road.
There's a similar situation with Aldgate and Tower Hill. :-(
Roland Perry
2022-05-13 05:32:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if the Met had
designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original Circle Line
shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).

The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2022-05-13 05:43:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if the Met had
designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original Circle Line
shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Roland Perry
2022-05-13 08:13:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if the Met had
designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original Circle Line
shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Sorry, can't parse that. Neither Met or Circle are "tube lines", if you
are using that expression to distinguish from Sub-surface, and in any
event from the rear of a Met train heading north, to a H&S/Circle train
heading west, isn't very far.

Similarly, with the hypothetical terminating platforms for the District
Line at Baker St, it's not far from the *front* of such a train to the
front of a Metropolitan train on its way from Finchley Road to Aldgate.
And at Kings Cross you are the right end to get as quickly as possible
to the heavy rail platforms.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2022-05-13 14:51:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if the Met had
designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original Circle Line
shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Sorry, can't parse that. Neither Met or Circle are "tube lines", if you
are using that expression to distinguish from Sub-surface, and in any
event from the rear of a Met train heading north, to a H&S/Circle train
heading west, isn't very far.
I thought it was obvious: you only get to the east end of the sub-surface
platforms when changing from a (deep) Tube line. If you're coming from the
mainline stations or the street, you enter near the western end of the
platforms.
Post by Roland Perry
Similarly, with the hypothetical terminating platforms for the District
Line at Baker St, it's not far from the *front* of such a train to the
front of a Metropolitan train on its way from Finchley Road to Aldgate.
And at Kings Cross you are the right end to get as quickly as possible
to the heavy rail platforms.
No you're not.
Roland Perry
2022-05-13 15:17:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if the Met had
designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original Circle Line
shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Sorry, can't parse that. Neither Met or Circle are "tube lines", if you
are using that expression to distinguish from Sub-surface, and in any
event from the rear of a Met train heading north, to a H&S/Circle train
heading west, isn't very far.
I thought it was obvious: you only get to the east end of the sub-surface
platforms when changing from a (deep) Tube line. If you're coming from the
mainline stations or the street, you enter near the western end of the
platforms.
The steps at "B" and just to the left of "A" are at the eastern end.

<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-ab-14630/>
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Similarly, with the hypothetical terminating platforms for the District
Line at Baker St, it's not far from the *front* of such a train to the
front of a Metropolitan train on its way from Finchley Road to Aldgate.
See again the steps just to the left of "A", above.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And at Kings Cross you are the right end to get as quickly as possible
to the heavy rail platforms.
No you're not.
See the steps in the centre of the "1-2-3" triangle here:

<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-hijklm-14683/>
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2022-05-13 22:19:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if the Met had
designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original Circle Line
shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Sorry, can't parse that. Neither Met or Circle are "tube lines", if you
are using that expression to distinguish from Sub-surface, and in any
event from the rear of a Met train heading north, to a H&S/Circle train
heading west, isn't very far.
I thought it was obvious: you only get to the east end of the sub-surface
platforms when changing from a (deep) Tube line. If you're coming from the
mainline stations or the street, you enter near the western end of the
platforms.
The steps at "B" and just to the left of "A" are at the eastern end.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-ab-14630/>
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Similarly, with the hypothetical terminating platforms for the District
Line at Baker St, it's not far from the *front* of such a train to the
front of a Metropolitan train on its way from Finchley Road to Aldgate.
See again the steps just to the left of "A", above.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And at Kings Cross you are the right end to get as quickly as possible
to the heavy rail platforms.
No you're not.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-hijklm-14683/>
You've forgotten where the ticket barriers are.
Roland Perry
2022-05-14 07:35:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to
Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if the Met had
designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original Circle Line
shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Sorry, can't parse that. Neither Met or Circle are "tube lines", if you
are using that expression to distinguish from Sub-surface, and in any
event from the rear of a Met train heading north, to a H&S/Circle train
heading west, isn't very far.
I thought it was obvious: you only get to the east end of the sub-surface
platforms when changing from a (deep) Tube line. If you're coming from the
mainline stations or the street, you enter near the western end of the
platforms.
The steps at "B" and just to the left of "A" are at the eastern end.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-ab-14630/>
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Similarly, with the hypothetical terminating platforms for the District
Line at Baker St, it's not far from the *front* of such a train to the
front of a Metropolitan train on its way from Finchley Road to Aldgate.
See again the steps just to the left of "A", above.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And at Kings Cross you are the right end to get as quickly as possible
to the heavy rail platforms.
No you're not.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-hijklm-14683/>
You've forgotten where the ticket barriers are.
No I haven't, and why does it matter where they are in between the
eastern end of the Circle Line platforms at Kings Cross, and the classic
ticket hall? They don't change the distance you need to walk.

And I don' think there are any ticket barriers to negotiate at Baker St
when changing from one subsurface line to another.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2022-05-14 10:35:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to
Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if the Met had
designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original Circle Line
shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Sorry, can't parse that. Neither Met or Circle are "tube lines", if you
are using that expression to distinguish from Sub-surface, and in any
event from the rear of a Met train heading north, to a H&S/Circle train
heading west, isn't very far.
I thought it was obvious: you only get to the east end of the sub-surface
platforms when changing from a (deep) Tube line. If you're coming from the
mainline stations or the street, you enter near the western end of the
platforms.
The steps at "B" and just to the left of "A" are at the eastern end.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-ab-14630/>
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Similarly, with the hypothetical terminating platforms for the District
Line at Baker St, it's not far from the *front* of such a train to the
front of a Metropolitan train on its way from Finchley Road to Aldgate.
See again the steps just to the left of "A", above.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And at Kings Cross you are the right end to get as quickly as possible
to the heavy rail platforms.
No you're not.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-hijklm-14683/>
You've forgotten where the ticket barriers are.
No I haven't, and why does it matter where they are in between the
eastern end of the Circle Line platforms at Kings Cross, and the classic
ticket hall? They don't change the distance you need to walk.
This route isn't signposted, and involves extra steps up and down. The
official rout has a lift, and fewer steps anyway.
Post by Roland Perry
And I don' think there are any ticket barriers to negotiate at Baker St
when changing from one subsurface line to another.
Obviously not, as they share platforms.
Roland Perry
2022-05-14 11:25:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle
lines at Baker Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's Cross wherever
it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if
the Met had designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original
Circle Line shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Sorry, can't parse that. Neither Met or Circle are "tube lines", if you
are using that expression to distinguish from Sub-surface, and in any
event from the rear of a Met train heading north, to a H&S/Circle train
heading west, isn't very far.
I thought it was obvious: you only get to the east end of the sub-surface
platforms when changing from a (deep) Tube line. If you're coming from the
mainline stations or the street, you enter near the western end of the
platforms.
The steps at "B" and just to the left of "A" are at the eastern end.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-ab-14630/>
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Similarly, with the hypothetical terminating platforms for the District
Line at Baker St, it's not far from the *front* of such a train to the
front of a Metropolitan train on its way from Finchley Road to Aldgate.
See again the steps just to the left of "A", above.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And at Kings Cross you are the right end to get as quickly as possible
to the heavy rail platforms.
No you're not.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-hijklm-14683/>
You've forgotten where the ticket barriers are.
No I haven't, and why does it matter where they are in between the
eastern end of the Circle Line platforms at Kings Cross, and the classic
ticket hall? They don't change the distance you need to walk.
This route isn't signposted, and involves extra steps up and down. The
official rout has a lift, and fewer steps anyway.
We'd stopped being obsessed about steps, and were looking at ways to
connect the majority of pax through from Paddington area to Kings Cross
(etc) with the hypothetical reversing point for the District at Baker
St, not Edgware Road.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And I don' think there are any ticket barriers to negotiate at Baker St
when changing from one subsurface line to another.
Obviously not, as they share platforms.
In the sense they are joined by a concourse spanning both Circle and Met
lines.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2022-05-14 16:49:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This
table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to
Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle
lines at Baker Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's Cross wherever
it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if
the Met had designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original
Circle Line shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Sorry, can't parse that. Neither Met or Circle are "tube lines", if you
are using that expression to distinguish from Sub-surface, and in any
event from the rear of a Met train heading north, to a H&S/Circle train
heading west, isn't very far.
I thought it was obvious: you only get to the east end of the sub-surface
platforms when changing from a (deep) Tube line. If you're coming from the
mainline stations or the street, you enter near the western end of the
platforms.
The steps at "B" and just to the left of "A" are at the eastern end.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-ab-14630/>
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Similarly, with the hypothetical terminating platforms for the District
Line at Baker St, it's not far from the *front* of such a train to the
front of a Metropolitan train on its way from Finchley Road to Aldgate.
See again the steps just to the left of "A", above.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And at Kings Cross you are the right end to get as quickly as possible
to the heavy rail platforms.
No you're not.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-hijklm-14683/>
You've forgotten where the ticket barriers are.
No I haven't, and why does it matter where they are in between the
eastern end of the Circle Line platforms at Kings Cross, and the classic
ticket hall? They don't change the distance you need to walk.
This route isn't signposted, and involves extra steps up and down. The
official rout has a lift, and fewer steps anyway.
We'd stopped being obsessed about steps, and were looking at ways to
connect the majority of pax through from Paddington area to Kings Cross
(etc) with the hypothetical reversing point for the District at Baker
St, not Edgware Road.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And I don' think there are any ticket barriers to negotiate at Baker St
when changing from one subsurface line to another.
Obviously not, as they share platforms.
In the sense they are joined by a concourse spanning both Circle and Met
lines.
No, the Circle, H&C and Met lines use the same tracks.
Anna Noyd-Dryver
2022-05-14 17:33:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This
table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost
before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to
Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle
lines at Baker Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's Cross wherever
it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if
the Met had designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original
Circle Line shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Sorry, can't parse that. Neither Met or Circle are "tube lines", if you
are using that expression to distinguish from Sub-surface, and in any
event from the rear of a Met train heading north, to a H&S/Circle train
heading west, isn't very far.
I thought it was obvious: you only get to the east end of the sub-surface
platforms when changing from a (deep) Tube line. If you're coming from the
mainline stations or the street, you enter near the western end of the
platforms.
The steps at "B" and just to the left of "A" are at the eastern end.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-ab-14630/>
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Similarly, with the hypothetical terminating platforms for the District
Line at Baker St, it's not far from the *front* of such a train to the
front of a Metropolitan train on its way from Finchley Road to Aldgate.
See again the steps just to the left of "A", above.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And at Kings Cross you are the right end to get as quickly as possible
to the heavy rail platforms.
No you're not.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-hijklm-14683/>
You've forgotten where the ticket barriers are.
No I haven't, and why does it matter where they are in between the
eastern end of the Circle Line platforms at Kings Cross, and the classic
ticket hall? They don't change the distance you need to walk.
This route isn't signposted, and involves extra steps up and down. The
official rout has a lift, and fewer steps anyway.
We'd stopped being obsessed about steps, and were looking at ways to
connect the majority of pax through from Paddington area to Kings Cross
(etc) with the hypothetical reversing point for the District at Baker
St, not Edgware Road.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And I don' think there are any ticket barriers to negotiate at Baker St
when changing from one subsurface line to another.
Obviously not, as they share platforms.
In the sense they are joined by a concourse spanning both Circle and Met
lines.
No, the Circle, H&C and Met lines use the same tracks.
At Baker St the Met line platforms are separate from, though adjacent to
and level with, the H&C/Circle platforms.


Anna Noyd-Dryver
Tweed
2022-05-14 17:42:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This
table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost
before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to
Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle
lines at Baker Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's Cross wherever
it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if
the Met had designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original
Circle Line shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Sorry, can't parse that. Neither Met or Circle are "tube lines", if you
are using that expression to distinguish from Sub-surface, and in any
event from the rear of a Met train heading north, to a H&S/Circle train
heading west, isn't very far.
I thought it was obvious: you only get to the east end of the sub-surface
platforms when changing from a (deep) Tube line. If you're coming from the
mainline stations or the street, you enter near the western end of the
platforms.
The steps at "B" and just to the left of "A" are at the eastern end.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-ab-14630/>
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Similarly, with the hypothetical terminating platforms for the District
Line at Baker St, it's not far from the *front* of such a train to the
front of a Metropolitan train on its way from Finchley Road to Aldgate.
See again the steps just to the left of "A", above.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And at Kings Cross you are the right end to get as quickly as possible
to the heavy rail platforms.
No you're not.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-hijklm-14683/>
You've forgotten where the ticket barriers are.
No I haven't, and why does it matter where they are in between the
eastern end of the Circle Line platforms at Kings Cross, and the classic
ticket hall? They don't change the distance you need to walk.
This route isn't signposted, and involves extra steps up and down. The
official rout has a lift, and fewer steps anyway.
We'd stopped being obsessed about steps, and were looking at ways to
connect the majority of pax through from Paddington area to Kings Cross
(etc) with the hypothetical reversing point for the District at Baker
St, not Edgware Road.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And I don' think there are any ticket barriers to negotiate at Baker St
when changing from one subsurface line to another.
Obviously not, as they share platforms.
In the sense they are joined by a concourse spanning both Circle and Met
lines.
No, the Circle, H&C and Met lines use the same tracks.
At Baker St the Met line platforms are separate from, though adjacent to
and level with, the H&C/Circle platforms.
Anna Noyd-Dryver
See here

https://cartometro.com/cartes/metro-tram-london/
Recliner
2022-05-14 19:13:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This
table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost
before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to
Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle
lines at Baker Street instead of Edgware Road,
Or Moorgate (see below). The extra 'convenience' of the full-circle
line, which abstracts paths, rather messes up some other journey arcs.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roger Lynn
you could catch the first train from King's Cross wherever
it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street.
Not really. It wouldn't be an easy change at Baker St, even if
the Met had designed it differently in 1863.
They could have mirrored Mansion House (indeed, the original
Circle Line shuttled between Mansion House and Moorgate).
The Baker St change from Met to Circle isn't too bad even as it stands,
especially if you make sure you are at the rear of the train leaving
Kings Cross, which the concourse there encourages anyway.
Only if you're changing from a Tube line.
Sorry, can't parse that. Neither Met or Circle are "tube lines", if you
are using that expression to distinguish from Sub-surface, and in any
event from the rear of a Met train heading north, to a H&S/Circle train
heading west, isn't very far.
I thought it was obvious: you only get to the east end of the sub-surface
platforms when changing from a (deep) Tube line. If you're coming from the
mainline stations or the street, you enter near the western end of the
platforms.
The steps at "B" and just to the left of "A" are at the eastern end.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-ab-14630/>
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Similarly, with the hypothetical terminating platforms for the District
Line at Baker St, it's not far from the *front* of such a train to the
front of a Metropolitan train on its way from Finchley Road to Aldgate.
See again the steps just to the left of "A", above.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And at Kings Cross you are the right end to get as quickly as possible
to the heavy rail platforms.
No you're not.
<https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-
station-hijklm-14683/>
You've forgotten where the ticket barriers are.
No I haven't, and why does it matter where they are in between the
eastern end of the Circle Line platforms at Kings Cross, and the classic
ticket hall? They don't change the distance you need to walk.
This route isn't signposted, and involves extra steps up and down. The
official rout has a lift, and fewer steps anyway.
We'd stopped being obsessed about steps, and were looking at ways to
connect the majority of pax through from Paddington area to Kings Cross
(etc) with the hypothetical reversing point for the District at Baker
St, not Edgware Road.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
And I don' think there are any ticket barriers to negotiate at Baker St
when changing from one subsurface line to another.
Obviously not, as they share platforms.
In the sense they are joined by a concourse spanning both Circle and Met
lines.
No, the Circle, H&C and Met lines use the same tracks.
At Baker St the Met line platforms are separate from, though adjacent to
and level with, the H&C/Circle platforms.
Yes, sorry, I was still thinking of Kings Cross/St P.

Anna Noyd-Dryver
2022-05-12 22:13:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road, you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street. And
in the other direction if your train terminated at Baker Street you'd get a
better selection of trains to change onto than you do at Edgware Road.
There's a similar situation with Aldgate and Tower Hill. :-(
I think you’d need a tunnel below the current running lines, from somewhere
around Paddington Praed Street platforms (potentially needing rebuild of
that station), through Edgware Road (new underground platforms required) to
Baker Street (new underground platforms). Unless you then found somewhere
(either Bayswater-Paddington or Baker Street - Great Portland Street) to
have a junction with lines going around the tunnel mouth as well as into
it, you then remove the operational flexibility to run through when
necessary (eg during engineering work, disruption, shoulder-peak service
changes, stock moves etc). Plus you'd probably need to close High Street
Kensington - Edgware Road for, what, 2-3 years while you dig the tunnels?


Anna Noyd-Dryver
Recliner
2022-05-13 05:09:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roger Lynn
Post by Roland Perry
In other news, people could enquire from National Rail. This table is a
magnificent example, where they ran out of steam almost before they'd
<https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/190874.aspx>
Not to mention someone expecting to do Kings Cross to Paddington on the
Met, is going to be disappointed.
If only there was a way to terminate the District and Circle lines at Baker
Street instead of Edgware Road, you could catch the first train from King's
Cross wherever it was going to, and if necessary change at Baker Street. And
in the other direction if your train terminated at Baker Street you'd get a
better selection of trains to change onto than you do at Edgware Road.
There's a similar situation with Aldgate and Tower Hill. :-(
I think you’d need a tunnel below the current running lines, from somewhere
around Paddington Praed Street platforms (potentially needing rebuild of
that station), through Edgware Road (new underground platforms required) to
Baker Street (new underground platforms). Unless you then found somewhere
(either Bayswater-Paddington or Baker Street - Great Portland Street) to
have a junction with lines going around the tunnel mouth as well as into
it, you then remove the operational flexibility to run through when
necessary (eg during engineering work, disruption, shoulder-peak service
changes, stock moves etc). Plus you'd probably need to close High Street
Kensington - Edgware Road for, what, 2-3 years while you dig the tunnels?
The new platform tunnels would have to be very deep, below the Bakerloo and
Jubilee line station tunnels.
Peter Johnson
2022-04-25 17:18:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Alternatively, use the H&C station, which has always been a bit of an
afterthought, and iirx after a rebuild is even further from the heavy
rail platforms. And is that step-free from the main shed yet?
I made use of the Hammersmith interchange last Tuesday. If I'd known
you were going to raise it I would have paid more attention to it.
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2022-04-26 23:18:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Tweed
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
It's the constant starting and stopping that's most wearing I think.
I like people-watching, and how the crown thins out leaving mainly
longhaul passengers, and wondering where they might be going, and why
the are dressed like *that*.
Touch wood, on the return trip it's also just as reliable (HEx is rather
granular,
I thought every 15 minutes was considered the general baseline for 'turn up
and go' operation?
I recently had to travel to Metroland, also assuming that it would be
'turn up and go.'

It was about 30 minutes before the train that I needed actually arrived.
Charles Ellson
2022-04-27 02:23:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly.
The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
It's the constant starting and stopping that's most wearing I think.
I like people-watching, and how the crown thins out leaving mainly
longhaul passengers, and wondering where they might be going, and why
the are dressed like *that*.
Touch wood, on the return trip it's also just as reliable (HEx is rather
granular,
I thought every 15 minutes was considered the general baseline for 'turn up
and go' operation?
I recently had to travel to Metroland, also assuming that it would be
'turn up and go.'
It was about 30 minutes before the train that I needed actually arrived.
For some outer destinations you night need to take the first train to
Harrow and change there. Similarly, if you are east of Baker Street
you might need to change either at Finchley Road (everything going out
of London stops there at the same platform) or Harrow.
Recliner
2022-04-27 03:56:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Tweed
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
It's the constant starting and stopping that's most wearing I think.
I like people-watching, and how the crown thins out leaving mainly
longhaul passengers, and wondering where they might be going, and why
the are dressed like *that*.
Touch wood, on the return trip it's also just as reliable (HEx is rather
granular,
I thought every 15 minutes was considered the general baseline for 'turn up
and go' operation?
I recently had to travel to Metroland, also assuming that it would be
'turn up and go.'
It was about 30 minutes before the train that I needed actually arrived.
Are you aware of the current (not-so) 'special service' on the Met?

Plus, Chesham never gets better than 2 tph, for obvious reasons.
Roland Perry
2022-04-27 04:38:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Tweed
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
It's the constant starting and stopping that's most wearing I think.
I like people-watching, and how the crown thins out leaving mainly
longhaul passengers, and wondering where they might be going, and why
the are dressed like *that*.
Touch wood, on the return trip it's also just as reliable (HEx is rather
granular,
I thought every 15 minutes was considered the general baseline for
'turn up and go' operation?
I recently had to travel to Metroland, also assuming that it would be
'turn up and go.'
It was about 30 minutes before the train that I needed actually arrived.
As far as I'm concerned the Met to Uxbridge became "turn up and go" when
they increased the frequency from every 20 minutes to every 15 minutes.
Seems like a small change, but somehow it made all the difference.

Of course, that was quite a long time ago, but the comment is still
relevant.
--
Roland Perry
Marland
2022-04-24 10:14:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tweed
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
But as the trains are more frequent, and go directly to all terminals, the
total journey time may not be much longer.
So long as T4 remains closed, don't the Picc, HEx, and Liz all go to
all open terminals?
Yes, that's true, but I was anticipating the reopening of T4, probably in a
couple of months.
Post by John Levine
I agree that the Picc feels like it takes forever but since you don't
have to change is usually just as fast.
No changes, and more frequent trains. And, of course, if your journey
starts in London, the Piccadilly is more likely to have a station nearby.
And I don't understand why the alleged tedium of a little under an hour
on the Piccadilly Line is significant compared to the ensuing two to
three hours of tedium at Heathrow, the five to ten hours of tedium on
the onward flight, and however many hours of tedium there are at the
arrival airport.
It’s utterly illogical, but I really don’t like the slow trio out to
Heathrow on the tube.
I’m about to depart for an overseas holiday so have not got time to list
details but there is heck of a lotof railway history west of Hammersmith to
look for.
Look up the history of the LSWR and District line and how the LSWR making
the section between Hammersmith where part of their viaduct still stands
and Stamford Brook,Ravenscourt Park Turnham 4 track caused the demise of
their own service but made room for the Piccadilly.
Those stations still look like main line railway.
Around Hounslow you used to be able to spot the junctions where the
original District Hounslow branch lead off.
Near Turnham green the power station for the trams of that area still
stands.
Acton still has the various works and depots, Still part of a water column
if you look hard at Acton.

Gunnersbury /Chiswick Park just before there has various connection some
used others long abandoned down to the North London line to look out for.
When the Piccadilly took over the main service from the District in the
1930’s it was modernised so you have Holdens architecture to study.

Should be enough to pass the time ,though not if its dark.

GH
Roland Perry
2022-04-23 06:10:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tweed
I hadn’t realised until just after my original post that EL/Crossrail was
going to initially open with an enforced change at Paddington.
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
Anyway, back to the original question, once EL is running as ultimately
intended I wonder what the intended routing is from StP to Heathrow.
If it's StP Thameslink, I'd expect to stay on the train and change at
Farringdon. For StP MML, I think change to Thameslink. For Eurostar the
least walking is subsurface to Farringdon.
--
Roland Perry
Anna Noyd-Dryver
2022-04-23 08:33:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Tweed
I hadn’t realised until just after my original post that EL/Crossrail was
going to initially open with an enforced change at Paddington.
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
Anyway, back to the original question, once EL is running as ultimately
intended I wonder what the intended routing is from StP to Heathrow.
If it's StP Thameslink, I'd expect to stay on the train and change at
Farringdon. For StP MML, I think change to Thameslink. For Eurostar the
least walking is subsurface to Farringdon.
I know you have a thing about walking distances at StP/KX, but in this
instance does half the length of the station building (MML escalators to E*
exit, perhaps 100m) really make that much of a difference that you'd go a
completely different way?


Anna Noyd-Dryver
Roland Perry
2022-04-23 09:13:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Tweed
I hadn’t realised until just after my original post that EL/Crossrail was
going to initially open with an enforced change at Paddington.
In the past I’ve tried HEx from Paddington and the Piccadilly. The latter
is less trouble, and cheaper but is very tedious.
Anyway, back to the original question, once EL is running as ultimately
intended I wonder what the intended routing is from StP to Heathrow.
If it's StP Thameslink, I'd expect to stay on the train and change at
Farringdon. For StP MML, I think change to Thameslink. For Eurostar the
least walking is subsurface to Farringdon.
I know you have a thing about walking distances at StP/KX, but in this
instance does half the length of the station building (MML escalators to E*
exit, perhaps 100m)
It's 140m, but right order of magnitude.
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
really make that much of a difference that you'd go a
completely different way?
It's unfortunate they didn't implement a shorter route from the MML
platforms to the Thameslink ones, but it's also less congested to u-turn
towards the latter. There's often quite a scrum outside the E* arrivals
to negotiate, for example.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
2022-04-23 09:11:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Whose brilliant idea was it to replace a well-known name
Thameslink with the here-today-gone-tomorrow name of the current company
that operated the service.
FirstGroup
I asked one of the railway staff "which way to
the Thameslink platforms" and he said in a weary "I'm fed up of having to
keep telling people" voice "Look for signs saying Govia".
Definitely not.
Again, you are the one in the wrong. Govia is the company that fixed the
problem, and should be praised, not unfairly blamed. And it it's never used
Govia branding on any of its trains. Thameslink has never been called
Govia.
Google maps, however, never got the memo about the demise of FCC:

https://goo.gl/maps/xBmRv6j1Cdj4Mais5
--
Roland Perry
NY
2022-04-23 10:45:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Have they sorted out the godawful mess they made of the signage to the
Thameslink platforms at St Pancras. When it first opened, I went to
investigate while I was in London and all the signs said "Govia" instead of
"Thameslink".
Don't blame Govia, which was the company that promptly sorted out the
naming mess as soon as it took over, more than seven years ago. Blame
FirstGroup, which foisted the awful FCC name on Thameslink.
<https://flickr.com/photos/recliner/17087374661/in/album-72157651787464546/>
Yes, it looks as if the name "Thameslink" is back again.
Post by Recliner
Whose brilliant idea was it to replace a well-known name
Thameslink with the here-today-gone-tomorrow name of the current company
that operated the service.
FirstGroup
I asked one of the railway staff "which way to
the Thameslink platforms" and he said in a weary "I'm fed up of having to
keep telling people" voice "Look for signs saying Govia".
Definitely not.
Again, you are the one in the wrong. Govia is the company that fixed the
problem, and should be praised, not unfairly blamed. And it it's never used
Govia branding on any of its trains. Thameslink has never been called
Govia.
Ok. My mistake. I was getting my FCCs and Govias mixed up. But the point is
that a TOC (evidently FCC) decided that it was "better" to use their own TOC
name (which I imagine is not very well known by the public) in place of a
long-established name "Thameslink" which actually describes what it does. If
the signs had said "FCC Thameslink" (or preferably "Thameslink FCC", putting
the important name first) then it would have been better. But to remove the
"Thameslink" is lunacy. Network Rail or the Rail Regulator or the Mayor of
London should have intervened and overruled the change of signage.

The whole "First" branding was idiotic anyway because "first", in relation
to train travel, has always implied first class carriages on a train. It
also lays them open to a lot of negative publicity every time there is a
problem on one of their routes and another rival service is able to get
people to their destination sooner.


It's like all the football stadiums which decide to rebrand themselves with
the name of their owner/sponsor company instead of keeping the
long-established name. All for a bit of vanity and publicity of their name.
Roland Perry
2022-04-23 11:22:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by NY
The whole "First" branding was idiotic anyway because "first", in
relation to train travel, has always implied first class carriages on a
train.
From time to time that confusion has raised is head. Of course FCC
wasn't the worst attempt at branding ever; I think that award must
go to "One". Although for a time the two brands co-existed at Cambridge
leading to lots of leg pulling about asking for the "first one" to
leave for London.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2022-04-23 12:35:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by NY
The whole "First" branding was idiotic anyway because "first", in
relation to train travel, has always implied first class carriages on a
train.
From time to time that confusion has raised is head. Of course FCC
wasn't the worst attempt at branding ever; I think that award must
go to "One". Although for a time the two brands co-existed at Cambridge
leading to lots of leg pulling about asking for the "first one" to
leave for London.
Yes, agreed, 'One' was the worst example, this time NatEx to blame. Another
of their silly ones was/is c2c. They also gave us the two Silverlink
branches.

In contrast, Govia has always had straightforward, geographic names with no
company branding, and reasonable liveries. So it seems particularly unfair
to blame it for the sins of the others.
Marland
2022-04-23 14:08:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by NY
The whole "First" branding was idiotic anyway because "first", in
relation to train travel, has always implied first class carriages on a
train.
From time to time that confusion has raised is head. Of course FCC
wasn't the worst attempt at branding ever; I think that award must
go to "One". Although for a time the two brands co-existed at Cambridge
leading to lots of leg pulling about asking for the "first one" to
leave for London.
Yes, agreed, 'One' was the worst example, this time NatEx to blame. Another
of their silly ones was/is c2c. They also gave us the two Silverlink
branches.
Not the transport industry but perhaps Graeme has some insight as to why
the ITV contractor TVS
called its evening news programme Coast to Coast , would have been
understandable if it had been Television Southwest whose service area
incorporated Devon and Cornwall both of which have Coastlines North and
South but I always thought it a bit daft for the area it was applied to.

GH
ColinR
2022-04-23 14:15:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by NY
The whole "First" branding was idiotic anyway because "first", in
relation to train travel, has always implied first class carriages on a
train.
From time to time that confusion has raised is head. Of course FCC
wasn't the worst attempt at branding ever; I think that award must
go to "One". Although for a time the two brands co-existed at Cambridge
leading to lots of leg pulling about asking for the "first one" to
leave for London.
Yes, agreed, 'One' was the worst example, this time NatEx to blame. Another
of their silly ones was/is c2c. They also gave us the two Silverlink
branches.
Not the transport industry but perhaps Graeme has some insight as to why
the ITV contractor TVS
called its evening news programme Coast to Coast , would have been
understandable if it had been Television Southwest whose service area
incorporated Devon and Cornwall both of which have Coastlines North and
South but I always thought it a bit daft for the area it was applied to.
GH
Maybe the Hampshire / Dorset coast as one and the Isle of Wight as the
other??
--
Colin
Graeme Wall
2022-04-23 15:46:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marland
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by NY
The whole "First" branding was idiotic anyway because "first", in
relation to train travel, has always implied first class carriages on a
train.
From time to time that confusion has raised is head. Of course FCC
wasn't the worst attempt at branding ever; I think that award must
go to "One". Although for a time the two brands co-existed at Cambridge
leading to lots of leg pulling about asking for the "first one" to
leave for London.
Yes, agreed, 'One' was the worst example, this time NatEx to blame. Another
of their silly ones was/is c2c. They also gave us the two Silverlink
branches.
Not the transport industry but perhaps Graeme has some insight as to why
the ITV contractor TVS
called its evening news programme Coast to Coast , would have been
understandable if it had been Television Southwest whose service area
incorporated Devon and Cornwall both of which have Coastlines North and
South but I always thought it a bit daft for the area it was applied to.
We thought it was daft as well, AIUI the logic was the service area was
bordered by the English Channel coast and the North Sea coast, which, of
course, meet at Dover.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Graeme Wall
2022-04-23 11:34:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by NY
Post by Recliner
Have they sorted out the godawful mess they made of the signage to the
Thameslink platforms at St Pancras. When it first opened, I went to
investigate while I was in London and all the signs said "Govia" instead of
"Thameslink".
Don't blame Govia, which was the company that promptly sorted out the
naming mess as soon as it took over, more than seven years ago. Blame
FirstGroup, which foisted the awful FCC name on Thameslink.
<https://flickr.com/photos/recliner/17087374661/in/album-72157651787464546/>
Yes, it looks as if the name "Thameslink" is back again.
Post by Recliner
Whose brilliant idea was it to replace a well-known name
Thameslink with the here-today-gone-tomorrow name of the current company
that operated the service.
FirstGroup
I asked one of the railway staff "which way to
the Thameslink platforms" and he said in a weary "I'm fed up of having to
keep telling people" voice "Look for signs saying Govia".
Definitely not.
Again, you are the one in the wrong. Govia is the company that fixed the
problem, and should be praised, not unfairly blamed. And it it's never used
Govia branding on any of its trains. Thameslink has never been called
Govia.
Ok. My mistake. I was getting my FCCs and Govias mixed up. But the point
is that a TOC (evidently FCC) decided that it was "better" to use their
own TOC name (which I imagine is not very well known by the public) in
place of a long-established name "Thameslink" which actually describes
what it does. If the signs had said "FCC Thameslink" (or preferably
"Thameslink FCC", putting the important name first) then it would have
been better. But to remove the "Thameslink" is lunacy. Network Rail or
the Rail Regulator or the Mayor of London should have intervened and
overruled the change of signage.
The whole "First" branding was idiotic anyway because "first", in
relation to train travel, has always implied first class carriages on a
train. It also lays them open to a lot of negative publicity every time
there is a problem on one of their routes and another rival service is
able to get people to their destination sooner.
First was actually a bus company when they adopted the name, still a
nonsense name but it was part of a trend at the time (see also One).
Post by NY
It's like all the football stadiums which decide to rebrand themselves
with the name of their owner/sponsor company instead of keeping the
long-established name. All for a bit of vanity and publicity of their name.
Renaming the stadium is usually a precondition for the sponsorship. The
whole point of sponsorship is to advertise the sponsoring company.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Recliner
2022-04-23 12:25:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by NY
Post by Recliner
Have they sorted out the godawful mess they made of the signage to the
Thameslink platforms at St Pancras. When it first opened, I went to
investigate while I was in London and all the signs said "Govia" instead of
"Thameslink".
Don't blame Govia, which was the company that promptly sorted out the
naming mess as soon as it took over, more than seven years ago. Blame
FirstGroup, which foisted the awful FCC name on Thameslink.
<https://flickr.com/photos/recliner/17087374661/in/album-72157651787464546/>
Yes, it looks as if the name "Thameslink" is back again.
Post by Recliner
Whose brilliant idea was it to replace a well-known name
Thameslink with the here-today-gone-tomorrow name of the current company
that operated the service.
FirstGroup
I asked one of the railway staff "which way to
the Thameslink platforms" and he said in a weary "I'm fed up of having to
keep telling people" voice "Look for signs saying Govia".
Definitely not.
Again, you are the one in the wrong. Govia is the company that fixed the
problem, and should be praised, not unfairly blamed. And it it's never used
Govia branding on any of its trains. Thameslink has never been called
Govia.
Ok. My mistake. I was getting my FCCs and Govias mixed up. But the point is
that a TOC (evidently FCC) decided that it was "better" to use their own TOC
name (which I imagine is not very well known by the public) in place of a
long-established name "Thameslink" which actually describes what it does. If
the signs had said "FCC Thameslink" (or preferably "Thameslink FCC", putting
the important name first) then it would have been better. But to remove the
"Thameslink" is lunacy. Network Rail or the Rail Regulator or the Mayor of
London should have intervened and overruled the change of signage.
The whole "First" branding was idiotic anyway because "first", in relation
to train travel, has always implied first class carriages on a train. It
also lays them open to a lot of negative publicity every time there is a
problem on one of their routes and another rival service is able to get
people to their destination sooner.
It's like all the football stadiums which decide to rebrand themselves with
the name of their owner/sponsor company instead of keeping the
long-established name. All for a bit of vanity and publicity of their name.
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Tweed
2022-04-23 13:42:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by NY
Post by Recliner
Have they sorted out the godawful mess they made of the signage to the
Thameslink platforms at St Pancras. When it first opened, I went to
investigate while I was in London and all the signs said "Govia" instead of
"Thameslink".
Don't blame Govia, which was the company that promptly sorted out the
naming mess as soon as it took over, more than seven years ago. Blame
FirstGroup, which foisted the awful FCC name on Thameslink.
<https://flickr.com/photos/recliner/17087374661/in/album-72157651787464546/>
Yes, it looks as if the name "Thameslink" is back again.
Post by Recliner
Whose brilliant idea was it to replace a well-known name
Thameslink with the here-today-gone-tomorrow name of the current company
that operated the service.
FirstGroup
I asked one of the railway staff "which way to
the Thameslink platforms" and he said in a weary "I'm fed up of having to
keep telling people" voice "Look for signs saying Govia".
Definitely not.
Again, you are the one in the wrong. Govia is the company that fixed the
problem, and should be praised, not unfairly blamed. And it it's never used
Govia branding on any of its trains. Thameslink has never been called
Govia.
Ok. My mistake. I was getting my FCCs and Govias mixed up. But the point is
that a TOC (evidently FCC) decided that it was "better" to use their own TOC
name (which I imagine is not very well known by the public) in place of a
long-established name "Thameslink" which actually describes what it does. If
the signs had said "FCC Thameslink" (or preferably "Thameslink FCC", putting
the important name first) then it would have been better. But to remove the
"Thameslink" is lunacy. Network Rail or the Rail Regulator or the Mayor of
London should have intervened and overruled the change of signage.
The whole "First" branding was idiotic anyway because "first", in relation
to train travel, has always implied first class carriages on a train. It
also lays them open to a lot of negative publicity every time there is a
problem on one of their routes and another rival service is able to get
people to their destination sooner.
It's like all the football stadiums which decide to rebrand themselves with
the name of their owner/sponsor company instead of keeping the
long-established name. All for a bit of vanity and publicity of their name.
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?

Anyway, to reverse a bit, Thameslink is very obviously Thameslink these
days. Written on the side of the grey trains in big letters. I have to say
I like the run from StP south through London. Particularly the pause on
Blackfriars bridge with the view along the river.
Charles Ellson
2022-04-23 16:14:01 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 13:42:32 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
Post by Recliner
Post by NY
Post by Recliner
Have they sorted out the godawful mess they made of the signage to the
Thameslink platforms at St Pancras. When it first opened, I went to
investigate while I was in London and all the signs said "Govia" instead of
"Thameslink".
Don't blame Govia, which was the company that promptly sorted out the
naming mess as soon as it took over, more than seven years ago. Blame
FirstGroup, which foisted the awful FCC name on Thameslink.
<https://flickr.com/photos/recliner/17087374661/in/album-72157651787464546/>
Yes, it looks as if the name "Thameslink" is back again.
Post by Recliner
Whose brilliant idea was it to replace a well-known name
Thameslink with the here-today-gone-tomorrow name of the current company
that operated the service.
FirstGroup
I asked one of the railway staff "which way to
the Thameslink platforms" and he said in a weary "I'm fed up of having to
keep telling people" voice "Look for signs saying Govia".
Definitely not.
Again, you are the one in the wrong. Govia is the company that fixed the
problem, and should be praised, not unfairly blamed. And it it's never used
Govia branding on any of its trains. Thameslink has never been called
Govia.
Ok. My mistake. I was getting my FCCs and Govias mixed up. But the point is
that a TOC (evidently FCC) decided that it was "better" to use their own TOC
name (which I imagine is not very well known by the public) in place of a
long-established name "Thameslink" which actually describes what it does. If
the signs had said "FCC Thameslink" (or preferably "Thameslink FCC", putting
the important name first) then it would have been better. But to remove the
"Thameslink" is lunacy. Network Rail or the Rail Regulator or the Mayor of
London should have intervened and overruled the change of signage.
The whole "First" branding was idiotic anyway because "first", in relation
to train travel, has always implied first class carriages on a train. It
also lays them open to a lot of negative publicity every time there is a
problem on one of their routes and another rival service is able to get
people to their destination sooner.
It's like all the football stadiums which decide to rebrand themselves with
the name of their owner/sponsor company instead of keeping the
long-established name. All for a bit of vanity and publicity of their name.
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
As done a few years ago with ScotRail and London Buses, the operators'
names occupying relatively minor areas with the general livery and
branding set by the relevant government body.
Anyway, to reverse a bit, Thameslink is very obviously Thameslink these
days. Written on the side of the grey trains in big letters. I have to say
I like the run from StP south through London. Particularly the pause on
Blackfriars bridge with the view along the river.
Recliner
2022-04-23 16:58:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
Post by NY
Post by Recliner
Have they sorted out the godawful mess they made of the signage to the
Thameslink platforms at St Pancras. When it first opened, I went to
investigate while I was in London and all the signs said "Govia" instead of
"Thameslink".
Don't blame Govia, which was the company that promptly sorted out the
naming mess as soon as it took over, more than seven years ago. Blame
FirstGroup, which foisted the awful FCC name on Thameslink.
<https://flickr.com/photos/recliner/17087374661/in/album-72157651787464546/>
Yes, it looks as if the name "Thameslink" is back again.
Post by Recliner
Whose brilliant idea was it to replace a well-known name
Thameslink with the here-today-gone-tomorrow name of the current company
that operated the service.
FirstGroup
I asked one of the railway staff "which way to
the Thameslink platforms" and he said in a weary "I'm fed up of having to
keep telling people" voice "Look for signs saying Govia".
Definitely not.
Again, you are the one in the wrong. Govia is the company that fixed the
problem, and should be praised, not unfairly blamed. And it it's never used
Govia branding on any of its trains. Thameslink has never been called
Govia.
Ok. My mistake. I was getting my FCCs and Govias mixed up. But the point is
that a TOC (evidently FCC) decided that it was "better" to use their own TOC
name (which I imagine is not very well known by the public) in place of a
long-established name "Thameslink" which actually describes what it does. If
the signs had said "FCC Thameslink" (or preferably "Thameslink FCC", putting
the important name first) then it would have been better. But to remove the
"Thameslink" is lunacy. Network Rail or the Rail Regulator or the Mayor of
London should have intervened and overruled the change of signage.
The whole "First" branding was idiotic anyway because "first", in relation
to train travel, has always implied first class carriages on a train. It
also lays them open to a lot of negative publicity every time there is a
problem on one of their routes and another rival service is able to get
people to their destination sooner.
It's like all the football stadiums which decide to rebrand themselves with
the name of their owner/sponsor company instead of keeping the
long-established name. All for a bit of vanity and publicity of their name.
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball rolling
first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly brand names date from
quite a few years ago, when early franchises were given more freedom to
'innovate'.
Post by Tweed
Anyway, to reverse a bit, Thameslink is very obviously Thameslink these
days. Written on the side of the grey trains in big letters.
Yes, thanks to Govia. All four of its GTR sub-franchises have equally
clear, sensible branding, though trains do get swapped between them, as
passenger volumes fluctuate.
Roland Perry
2022-04-23 19:15:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Thameslink is very obviously Thameslink these
days. Written on the side of the grey trains in big letters.
Yes, thanks to Govia. All four of its GTR sub-franchises have equally
clear, sensible branding, though trains do get swapped between them, as
passenger volumes fluctuate.
The bright red Gatwick Express Electrostars are now apparently a
permanent fixture on GN to Kings Lynn.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2022-04-23 19:47:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Thameslink is very obviously Thameslink these
days. Written on the side of the grey trains in big letters.
Yes, thanks to Govia. All four of its GTR sub-franchises have equally
clear, sensible branding, though trains do get swapped between them, as
passenger volumes fluctuate.
The bright red Gatwick Express Electrostars are now apparently a
permanent fixture on GN to Kings Lynn.
Presumably only until GatEx fully resumes its traditional schedule?
Currently, I think it's running at 50%.

I've also been on GatEx trains running SN services, away from normal GatEx
routes. I think that's allowed some updating of SN's 377s (fitting plug
sockets, etc). GWR has also borrowed some of the 387s to fill in for
cracked IETs.

Isn't there also swapping of trains between GN and TL?
Tweed
2022-04-23 20:27:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Thameslink is very obviously Thameslink these
days. Written on the side of the grey trains in big letters.
Yes, thanks to Govia. All four of its GTR sub-franchises have equally
clear, sensible branding, though trains do get swapped between them, as
passenger volumes fluctuate.
The bright red Gatwick Express Electrostars are now apparently a
permanent fixture on GN to Kings Lynn.
Presumably only until GatEx fully resumes its traditional schedule?
Currently, I think it's running at 50%.
I've also been on GatEx trains running SN services, away from normal GatEx
routes. I think that's allowed some updating of SN's 377s (fitting plug
sockets, etc). GWR has also borrowed some of the 387s to fill in for
cracked IETs.
Isn't there also swapping of trains between GN and TL?
Does the GatEx have any logic now that ThamesLink provide a decent service
that starts at multiple stations within central (no don’t argue about the
definition of that….) London?
Recliner
2022-04-23 20:40:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Thameslink is very obviously Thameslink these
days. Written on the side of the grey trains in big letters.
Yes, thanks to Govia. All four of its GTR sub-franchises have equally
clear, sensible branding, though trains do get swapped between them, as
passenger volumes fluctuate.
The bright red Gatwick Express Electrostars are now apparently a
permanent fixture on GN to Kings Lynn.
Presumably only until GatEx fully resumes its traditional schedule?
Currently, I think it's running at 50%.
I've also been on GatEx trains running SN services, away from normal GatEx
routes. I think that's allowed some updating of SN's 377s (fitting plug
sockets, etc). GWR has also borrowed some of the 387s to fill in for
cracked IETs.
Isn't there also swapping of trains between GN and TL?
Does the GatEx have any logic now that ThamesLink provide a decent service
that starts at multiple stations within central (no don’t argue about the
definition of that….) London?
Its main function is to rip off tourists who pay more than they would on SN
services to Victoria, for the privilege of sitting bolt upright on tungsten
seats for a couple of minutes shorter journey, as it skips the East Croydon
and Clapham Junction stops. The cheaper green 377s are much more
comfortable than the red 387s.
Roland Perry
2022-04-24 05:58:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Thameslink is very obviously Thameslink these
days. Written on the side of the grey trains in big letters.
Yes, thanks to Govia. All four of its GTR sub-franchises have equally
clear, sensible branding, though trains do get swapped between them, as
passenger volumes fluctuate.
The bright red Gatwick Express Electrostars are now apparently a
permanent fixture on GN to Kings Lynn.
Presumably only until GatEx fully resumes its traditional schedule?
Currently, I think it's running at 50%.
I've also been on GatEx trains running SN services, away from normal GatEx
routes. I think that's allowed some updating of SN's 377s (fitting plug
sockets, etc). GWR has also borrowed some of the 387s to fill in for
cracked IETs.
Isn't there also swapping of trains between GN and TL?
Does the GatEx have any logic now that ThamesLink provide a decent service
that starts at multiple stations within central (no don’t argue about the
definition of that….) London?
Its main function is to rip off tourists who pay more than they would on SN
services to Victoria, for the privilege of sitting bolt upright on tungsten
seats for a couple of minutes shorter journey, as it skips the East Croydon
and Clapham Junction stops. The cheaper green 377s are much more
comfortable than the red 387s.
Back in the day, the main advantage was an empty train at Gatwick,
rather than one packed with Brighton commuters, and of course with
some useful luggage space.

Returning, there was an easy to find customer-friendly dedicated
platform at Victoria, with staff who didn't treat every passenger like
they were a convicted fare-dodger.

There's also the "airport express" phenomenon, where travellers
unfamiliar with their destination's spaghetti of commuter train services
and incomprehensible ticketing systems, are prepared to pay a small
premium for a flat-fare shuttle that will make at least some effort to
accommodate their particular needs.

Like HEx, it's essentially a poor-man's limo service to the city centre.
--
Roland Perry
Anna Noyd-Dryver
2022-04-23 21:26:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
The bright red Gatwick Express Electrostars are now apparently a
permanent fixture on GN to Kings Lynn.
Presumably only until GatEx fully resumes its traditional schedule?
Currently, I think it's running at 50%.
I've also been on GatEx trains running SN services, away from normal GatEx
routes. I think that's allowed some updating of SN's 377s (fitting plug
sockets, etc). GWR has also borrowed some of the 387s to fill in for
cracked IETs.
They were returned some while ago. The white ex-c2c ones are now on direct
lease to gWr rather than sub-lease, and have been modified to be able to
operate as per the normal gWr fleet (rather than being restricted to
Reading-Newbury, or middle of 12-car, as previously); one has received gWr
branding in place of c2c branding, and at least one other has been at least
partly de-branded.


Anna Noyd-Dryver
Roland Perry
2022-04-24 06:06:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Thameslink is very obviously Thameslink these
days. Written on the side of the grey trains in big letters.
Yes, thanks to Govia. All four of its GTR sub-franchises have equally
clear, sensible branding, though trains do get swapped between them, as
passenger volumes fluctuate.
The bright red Gatwick Express Electrostars are now apparently a
permanent fixture on GN to Kings Lynn.
Presumably only until GatEx fully resumes its traditional schedule?
They've put some new vinyl stickers on them, something like "Great
Northern operated by Gatwick Express". But it's the bright red paint you
see from a distance (contrasting with the white paint on the second
unit-of-four)
Post by Recliner
Currently, I think it's running at 50%.
I've also been on GatEx trains running SN services, away from normal GatEx
routes. I think that's allowed some updating of SN's 377s (fitting plug
sockets, etc). GWR has also borrowed some of the 387s to fill in for
cracked IETs.
Isn't there also swapping of trains between GN and TL?
Early in lockdown we saw a few 700's operating GN services (to and north
of) Cambridge, but I presume whatever stock shortage that was a symptom
of, has been fixed long term with the Gatex Electrostars.
--
Roland Perry
Anna Noyd-Dryver
2022-04-23 21:26:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball rolling
first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly brand names date from
quite a few years ago, when early franchises were given more freedom to
'innovate'.
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC. Later takeovers or refranchising established
that habit.

Northern Spirit was perhaps the 'silliest' of the initial franchise names?


Anna Noyd-Dryver
Recliner
2022-04-23 22:01:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball rolling
first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly brand names date from
quite a few years ago, when early franchises were given more freedom to
'innovate'.
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC. Later takeovers or refranchising established
that habit.
Yes, I think most of the first batch were MBOs, who had no interest in
supposedly catchy branding. It was when they sold out to or were replaced
by companies like First and NatEx, which acquired multiple TOCs, that some
marketing genius decided that privatised train services were a classic
consumer product, so lots more passengers would be attracted if only the
branding was wackier. Mobile phone companies went through a similar phase
in the same period, and some new banks have the same idea now.
Roland Perry
2022-04-24 06:15:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball
rolling first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly
brand names date from quite a few years ago, when early franchises
were given more freedom to 'innovate'.
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC. Later takeovers or refranchising established
that habit.
Yes, I think most of the first batch were MBOs, who had no interest in
supposedly catchy branding. It was when they sold out to or were replaced
by companies like First and NatEx, which acquired multiple TOCs, that some
marketing genius decided that privatised train services were a classic
consumer product, so lots more passengers would be attracted if only the
branding was wackier. Mobile phone companies went through a similar phase
in the same period, and some new banks have the same idea now.
It was also thus (see what I did there?) in the telecoms industry.

Still waiting for "3" to rebrand as "5" when they switch off their
original network.

Earlier, I came up with the branding "UK Online", for a startup consumer
ISP, which was later stolen by HMG. Of course, it was channelling
"America Online" and another startup at the same time that crashed and
burned "Europe Online". And today I think people more associate MSN with
the TV channel than Microsoft Network (a failed attempt at cloning AOL).
--
Roland Perry
Anna Noyd-Dryver
2022-04-24 06:38:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball rolling
first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly brand names date from
quite a few years ago, when early franchises were given more freedom to
'innovate'.
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC. Later takeovers or refranchising established
that habit.
Yes, I think most of the first batch were MBOs, who had no interest in
supposedly catchy branding. It was when they sold out to or were replaced
by companies like First and NatEx, which acquired multiple TOCs, that some
marketing genius decided that privatised train services were a classic
consumer product, so lots more passengers would be attracted if only the
branding was wackier. Mobile phone companies went through a similar phase
in the same period, and some new banks have the same idea now.
Which ones other than c2c, One and FCC do you consider 'wacky'? Most were a
geographical name with the owning group appended, surely, or occasionally
just the name of that group (Connex).


Anna Noyd-Dryver
Sam Wilson
2022-04-24 07:38:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball rolling
first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly brand names date from
quite a few years ago, when early franchises were given more freedom to
'innovate'.
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC. Later takeovers or refranchising established
that habit.
Yes, I think most of the first batch were MBOs, who had no interest in
supposedly catchy branding. It was when they sold out to or were replaced
by companies like First and NatEx, which acquired multiple TOCs, that some
marketing genius decided that privatised train services were a classic
consumer product, so lots more passengers would be attracted if only the
branding was wackier. Mobile phone companies went through a similar phase
in the same period, and some new banks have the same idea now.
Which ones other than c2c, One and FCC do you consider 'wacky'? Most were a
geographical name with the owning group appended, surely, or occasionally
just the name of that group (Connex).
Silverlink with their purple and green trains? I liked the livery, which
seemed to make me a bit unusual, but the name made no sense.

Sam
--
The entity formerly known as ***@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply
Tweed
2022-04-24 07:52:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball rolling
first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly brand names date from
quite a few years ago, when early franchises were given more freedom to
'innovate'.
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC. Later takeovers or refranchising established
that habit.
Yes, I think most of the first batch were MBOs, who had no interest in
supposedly catchy branding. It was when they sold out to or were replaced
by companies like First and NatEx, which acquired multiple TOCs, that some
marketing genius decided that privatised train services were a classic
consumer product, so lots more passengers would be attracted if only the
branding was wackier. Mobile phone companies went through a similar phase
in the same period, and some new banks have the same idea now.
Which ones other than c2c, One and FCC do you consider 'wacky'? Most were a
geographical name with the owning group appended, surely, or occasionally
just the name of that group (Connex).
Silverlink with their purple and green trains? I liked the livery, which
seemed to make me a bit unusual, but the name made no sense.
Sam
Not just a railway thing. The whole country was in thrall to the branding
folk. Consignia anyone? Also remember when every brand name had to be
accompanied by a mission statement strapline, eg “Metropolitan Police -
working for a safer London” (or vacuous words to that effect). All a lot
easier than the hard work of actually achieving anything.
Graeme Wall
2022-04-24 09:30:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tweed
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball rolling
first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly brand names date from
quite a few years ago, when early franchises were given more freedom to
'innovate'.
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC. Later takeovers or refranchising established
that habit.
Yes, I think most of the first batch were MBOs, who had no interest in
supposedly catchy branding. It was when they sold out to or were replaced
by companies like First and NatEx, which acquired multiple TOCs, that some
marketing genius decided that privatised train services were a classic
consumer product, so lots more passengers would be attracted if only the
branding was wackier. Mobile phone companies went through a similar phase
in the same period, and some new banks have the same idea now.
Which ones other than c2c, One and FCC do you consider 'wacky'? Most were a
geographical name with the owning group appended, surely, or occasionally
just the name of that group (Connex).
Silverlink with their purple and green trains? I liked the livery, which
seemed to make me a bit unusual, but the name made no sense.
Sam
Not just a railway thing. The whole country was in thrall to the branding
folk. Consignia anyone? Also remember when every brand name had to be
accompanied by a mission statement strapline, eg “Metropolitan Police -
working for a safer London” (or vacuous words to that effect). All a lot
easier than the hard work of actually achieving anything.
Taken from the Californian (?) police motto, to Protect and to Serve,
allegedly a Hollywood invention. I came across a faux American police
car in Southampton with the legend: To Protect and to Serve Beer,
belonged to the landlord of a local pub.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Marland
2022-04-24 10:21:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Tweed
Not just a railway thing. The whole country was in thrall to the branding
folk. Consignia anyone? Also remember when every brand name had to be
accompanied by a mission statement strapline, eg “Metropolitan Police -
working for a safer London” (or vacuous words to that effect). All a lot
easier than the hard work of actually achieving anything.
Taken from the Californian (?) police motto, to Protect and to Serve,
allegedly a Hollywood invention. I came across a faux American police
car in Southampton with the legend: To Protect and to Serve Beer,
belonged to the landlord of a local pub.
We fitted a Whitbread Trophy counter display to the roof of my mates Austin
Cambridge back in the 1970’s and arranged for it to flash when on the way
to New Forest Pubs.
The Police expressed a dim view but took no action.( We always used a
nominated and correctly insured driver)

GH
Charles Ellson
2022-04-24 17:31:22 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 10:30:57 +0100, Graeme Wall
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Tweed
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Recliner
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball rolling
first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly brand names date from
quite a few years ago, when early franchises were given more freedom to
'innovate'.
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC. Later takeovers or refranchising established
that habit.
Yes, I think most of the first batch were MBOs, who had no interest in
supposedly catchy branding. It was when they sold out to or were replaced
by companies like First and NatEx, which acquired multiple TOCs, that some
marketing genius decided that privatised train services were a classic
consumer product, so lots more passengers would be attracted if only the
branding was wackier. Mobile phone companies went through a similar phase
in the same period, and some new banks have the same idea now.
Which ones other than c2c, One and FCC do you consider 'wacky'? Most were a
geographical name with the owning group appended, surely, or occasionally
just the name of that group (Connex).
Silverlink with their purple and green trains? I liked the livery, which
seemed to make me a bit unusual, but the name made no sense.
Sam
Not just a railway thing. The whole country was in thrall to the branding
folk. Consignia anyone? Also remember when every brand name had to be
accompanied by a mission statement strapline, eg “Metropolitan Police -
working for a safer London” (or vacuous words to that effect). All a lot
easier than the hard work of actually achieving anything.
Taken from the Californian (?) police motto, to Protect and to Serve,
allegedly a Hollywood invention. I came across a faux American police
car in Southampton with the legend: To Protect and to Serve Beer,
belonged to the landlord of a local pub.
Close, it is attributed as the LAPD's motto from 1955
https://www.culinaryepicenter.com/my-mom-wrote-the-motto-to-protect-and-to-serve/
Anna Noyd-Dryver
2022-04-24 18:03:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball rolling
first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly brand names date from
quite a few years ago, when early franchises were given more freedom to
'innovate'.
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC. Later takeovers or refranchising established
that habit.
Yes, I think most of the first batch were MBOs, who had no interest in
supposedly catchy branding. It was when they sold out to or were replaced
by companies like First and NatEx, which acquired multiple TOCs, that some
marketing genius decided that privatised train services were a classic
consumer product, so lots more passengers would be attracted if only the
branding was wackier. Mobile phone companies went through a similar phase
in the same period, and some new banks have the same idea now.
Which ones other than c2c, One and FCC do you consider 'wacky'? Most were a
geographical name with the owning group appended, surely, or occasionally
just the name of that group (Connex).
Silverlink with their purple and green trains? I liked the livery, which
seemed to make me a bit unusual, but the name made no sense.
Good point!


Anna Noyd-Dryver
Charles Ellson
2022-04-24 17:22:05 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 07:38:37 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
Post by Sam Wilson
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Recliner
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball rolling
first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly brand names date from
quite a few years ago, when early franchises were given more freedom to
'innovate'.
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC. Later takeovers or refranchising established
that habit.
Yes, I think most of the first batch were MBOs, who had no interest in
supposedly catchy branding. It was when they sold out to or were replaced
by companies like First and NatEx, which acquired multiple TOCs, that some
marketing genius decided that privatised train services were a classic
consumer product, so lots more passengers would be attracted if only the
branding was wackier. Mobile phone companies went through a similar phase
in the same period, and some new banks have the same idea now.
Which ones other than c2c, One and FCC do you consider 'wacky'? Most were a
geographical name with the owning group appended, surely, or occasionally
just the name of that group (Connex).
Silverlink with their purple and green trains? I liked the livery, which
seemed to make me a bit unusual, but the name made no sense.
aka "Vomitlink" because of that colour scheme. It didn't overcome the
description "DC line".
Recliner
2022-04-24 07:48:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Tweed
Post by Recliner
First went through a misguided marketing phase of inserting the company
brand in front of TOC names, but it has since been 'persuaded' not to do
so. So, it's now GWR not fGW, TPE not fTPE, SWR not fSW, and Avanti WC not
fWC.
Hasn’t it been a requirement of recent franchise awards to have a TOC
independent name that can be bequeathed to a new encumbent without
extensive alterations?
Yes, but FirstGroup was persuaded/volunteered to start the ball rolling
first with its existing fGW—>GWR franchise. The silly brand names date from
quite a few years ago, when early franchises were given more freedom to
'innovate'.
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC. Later takeovers or refranchising established
that habit.
Yes, I think most of the first batch were MBOs, who had no interest in
supposedly catchy branding. It was when they sold out to or were replaced
by companies like First and NatEx, which acquired multiple TOCs, that some
marketing genius decided that privatised train services were a classic
consumer product, so lots more passengers would be attracted if only the
branding was wackier. Mobile phone companies went through a similar phase
in the same period, and some new banks have the same idea now.
Which ones other than c2c, One and FCC do you consider 'wacky'? Most were a
geographical name with the owning group appended, surely, or occasionally
just the name of that group (Connex).
Silverlink Metro and County?

Wessex is more whimsical than geographic.

WAGN was, technically, geographic, but not very helpfully.
Anna Noyd-Dryver
2022-04-24 18:03:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Which ones other than c2c, One and FCC do you consider 'wacky'? Most were a
geographical name with the owning group appended, surely, or occasionally
just the name of that group (Connex).
Wessex is more whimsical than geographic.
Wessex came later, the original franchise was Wales and West.


Anna Noyd-Dryver
Recliner
2022-04-24 18:11:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Post by Recliner
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Which ones other than c2c, One and FCC do you consider 'wacky'? Most were a
geographical name with the owning group appended, surely, or occasionally
just the name of that group (Connex).
Wessex is more whimsical than geographic.
Wessex came later, the original franchise was Wales and West.
Yes, as we discussed earlier, the wacky names came a few years after
franchising began; the original franchies mostly had prosaic geographic
names. I think they were mainly the work of NatEx and First, who also
tended to go in for very colourful liveries.
Roland Perry
2022-04-24 06:02:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Most of the initial franchises (except Virgin) didn't have the franchisee
identity in the name, IIRC.
Perhaps because many were essentially independent startups.
Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Later takeovers or refranchising established that habit.
Northern Spirit was perhaps the 'silliest' of the initial franchise names?
How about (although it wasn't coined immediately) "We Are Going Nowhere"
(aka "three wheels on my WAGN, and we are still rolling along").
--
Roland Perry
Marland
2022-04-23 13:57:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by NY
It's like all the football stadiums which decide to rebrand themselves with
the name of their owner/sponsor company instead of keeping the
long-established name. All for a bit of vanity and publicity of their name.
For the football business masquerading as a “club” it earns them quite a
lot of money, though occasionally it causes image problems when the Sponsor
becomes the corporate equivalent of persona non grata .


GH
Clive Page
2022-04-24 10:59:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
It's much easier, much cheaper, and probably no slower, to just take a
direct Piccadilly train to any Heathrow terminal. Step-free all the way,
and the seats are more comfortable.
Agreed, but 'step free' at St.Pancras means taking, if I remember correctly, about 5 lifts. Most of them are well hidden, and at any given time the chances that all are actually in working order is smallish. Be prepared to lug your luggage down quite a few escalators.
--
Clive Page
Roland Perry
2022-04-24 12:08:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Clive Page
Post by Recliner
It's much easier, much cheaper, and probably no slower, to just take a
direct Piccadilly train to any Heathrow terminal. Step-free all the way,
and the seats are more comfortable.
Agreed, but 'step free' at St.Pancras means taking, if I remember
correctly, about 5 lifts.
Depends where you are starting from, but let's assume the MML platforms.

One lift down to ground level.

U-turn, first right, through the "Market", and then there's a lift which
also serves the HS1 platforms.

Down to the "Northern Ticket Hall" level, and adjacent to the barriers
is the longest of these lifts, down to the mezzanine level.

From there a long passage to the Picc/Vicc platforms, each of which has
a short lift down to platform level.
Post by Clive Page
Most of them are well hidden, and at any given time the chances that
all are actually in working order is smallish.
FWIW I've never seen any of them out of action. The lifts themselves
aren't hidden, but there's no overall plan, almost every one having its
own small target market.
Post by Clive Page
Be prepared to lug your luggage down quite a few escalators.
That's true almost everywhere, unless carefully planned. What's properly
awful is stairs-only, like at Edgware Road.

If the Circle was still a Circle, it'd be possible to do a lot less
walking, and take three lifts (two very short) down to the Subsurface
platforms at the front of St Pancras, then same platform change to the
District somewhere like Bayswater, then cross platform to the Piccadilly
at Barons Court or Hammersmith.
--
Roland Perry
Theo
2022-04-24 13:44:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roland Perry
If the Circle was still a Circle, it'd be possible to do a lot less
walking, and take three lifts (two very short) down to the Subsurface
platforms at the front of St Pancras, then same platform change to the
District somewhere like Bayswater, then cross platform to the Piccadilly
at Barons Court or Hammersmith.
What's the interchange like at Hammersmith between Circle/H&C and
Piccadilly? Looking at the journey planner it seems about evens using
either to get from St Pancras. Possibly the Circle/H&C would be an option
for those wanting an alternative route (with less tunnel)?

Theo
Recliner
2022-04-24 14:02:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Theo
Post by Roland Perry
If the Circle was still a Circle, it'd be possible to do a lot less
walking, and take three lifts (two very short) down to the Subsurface
platforms at the front of St Pancras, then same platform change to the
District somewhere like Bayswater, then cross platform to the Piccadilly
at Barons Court or Hammersmith.
What's the interchange like at Hammersmith between Circle/H&C and
Piccadilly? Looking at the journey planner it seems about evens using
either to get from St Pancras. Possibly the Circle/H&C would be an option
for those wanting an alternative route (with less tunnel)?
It's an OSI. Hammersmith H&C is at ground level, cross the road, go into
the shopping centre, one lift down to either platform.
Roland Perry
2022-04-24 15:43:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Theo
Post by Roland Perry
If the Circle was still a Circle, it'd be possible to do a lot less
walking, and take three lifts (two very short) down to the Subsurface
platforms at the front of St Pancras, then same platform change to the
District somewhere like Bayswater, then cross platform to the Piccadilly
at Barons Court or Hammersmith.
What's the interchange like at Hammersmith between Circle/H&C and
Piccadilly? Looking at the journey planner it seems about evens using
either to get from St Pancras. Possibly the Circle/H&C would be an option
for those wanting an alternative route (with less tunnel)?
iirc it's on the level coming out of the Circle/H&C station, but then
you have to cross the road and find the Piccadilly/District station,
which reportedly has lifts down to the platform level.
--
Roland Perry
Graeme Wall
2022-04-24 15:57:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Theo
Post by Roland Perry
If the Circle was still a Circle, it'd be possible to do a lot less
walking, and take three lifts (two very short) down to the Subsurface
platforms at the front of St Pancras, then same platform change to the
District somewhere like Bayswater, then cross platform to the Piccadilly
at Barons Court or Hammersmith.
What's the interchange like at Hammersmith between Circle/H&C and
Piccadilly? Looking at the journey planner it seems about evens using
either to get from St Pancras. Possibly the Circle/H&C would be an option
for those wanting an alternative route (with less tunnel)?
Involves an underpass to get across Hammersmith Broadway.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Recliner
2022-04-24 16:10:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Theo
Post by Roland Perry
If the Circle was still a Circle, it'd be possible to do a lot less
walking, and take three lifts (two very short) down to the Subsurface
platforms at the front of St Pancras, then same platform change to the
District somewhere like Bayswater, then cross platform to the Piccadilly
at Barons Court or Hammersmith.
What's the interchange like at Hammersmith between Circle/H&C and
Piccadilly? Looking at the journey planner it seems about evens using
either to get from St Pancras. Possibly the Circle/H&C would be an option
for those wanting an alternative route (with less tunnel)?
Involves an underpass to get across Hammersmith Broadway.
That closed many years ago!

You just walk across the road when the little green man invites you to do
so. It's all on the level. The Piccadilly/District station is just inside
the shopping centre, and can't be missed. After the barriers, there are
lifts down to both island platforms. All very easy and straightforward, and
of course all westbound H&C/Circle trains at Kings X St P now go to
Hammersmith, so it's quite a frequent service.
Graeme Wall
2022-04-24 16:19:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
Post by Graeme Wall
Post by Theo
Post by Roland Perry
If the Circle was still a Circle, it'd be possible to do a lot less
walking, and take three lifts (two very short) down to the Subsurface
platforms at the front of St Pancras, then same platform change to the
District somewhere like Bayswater, then cross platform to the Piccadilly
at Barons Court or Hammersmith.
What's the interchange like at Hammersmith between Circle/H&C and
Piccadilly? Looking at the journey planner it seems about evens using
either to get from St Pancras. Possibly the Circle/H&C would be an option
for those wanting an alternative route (with less tunnel)?
Involves an underpass to get across Hammersmith Broadway.
That closed many years ago!
Shows how long it is since I've been there!
Post by Recliner
You just walk across the road when the little green man invites you to do
so. It's all on the level. The Piccadilly/District station is just inside
the shopping centre, and can't be missed. After the barriers, there are
lifts down to both island platforms. All very easy and straightforward, and
of course all westbound H&C/Circle trains at Kings X St P now go to
Hammersmith, so it's quite a frequent service.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.
Theo
2022-04-24 21:38:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Recliner
You just walk across the road when the little green man invites you to do
so. It's all on the level. The Piccadilly/District station is just inside
the shopping centre, and can't be missed. After the barriers, there are
lifts down to both island platforms. All very easy and straightforward, and
of course all westbound H&C/Circle trains at Kings X St P now go to
Hammersmith, so it's quite a frequent service.
Thanks. So probably marginally more hassle than the twisty passages all
alike of KXSP, but possibly an option if you aren't in a hurry / want some
more variety / daylight / mobile signal / possibly quieter trains.

Might also be a more pleasant place to wait if you're wanting a tube to T4
or T5 and need to let the 'wrong' trains go past.

Also possibly a useful option if you're starting somewhere not on the
Piccadilly, like Euston.

Theo
Recliner
2022-04-25 07:12:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Theo
Post by Recliner
You just walk across the road when the little green man invites you to do
so. It's all on the level. The Piccadilly/District station is just inside
the shopping centre, and can't be missed. After the barriers, there are
lifts down to both island platforms. All very easy and straightforward, and
of course all westbound H&C/Circle trains at Kings X St P now go to
Hammersmith, so it's quite a frequent service.
Thanks. So probably marginally more hassle than the twisty passages all
alike of KXSP, but possibly an option if you aren't in a hurry / want some
more variety / daylight / mobile signal / possibly quieter trains.
Might also be a more pleasant place to wait if you're wanting a tube to T4
or T5 and need to let the 'wrong' trains go past.
Also possibly a useful option if you're starting somewhere not on the
Piccadilly, like Euston.
Yes to all of those. Hammersmith Piccadilly is open air, but with covered
platforms and waiting rooms, so it's a nicer place to wait than most deep
Tube platforms. If not in a hurry, you could also pick up a snack in the
shops above, or change currency.
Loading...