|
Post by tubegeek on Jan 15, 2011 13:39:44 GMT
Can anyone help??? i was made aware some time ago that a station was to be built between Park Royal and Alperton on the Piccadilly line. also that some foundations actually still exist but the final building was never completed. on my many travels on this part of the line ive always tried to view any remnants of this station but can not see anything. Has anyone ever heard of this before any information and pictures would be much appreciated.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Jan 15, 2011 14:30:38 GMT
Not heard of that before, must admit; was it in the grand New Works plan?
On another note (wearing Mod hat) - please don't start threads in capital letters - we don't do shouting here! ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2011 14:43:40 GMT
Not aware of it either.
However, do you mean the old Park Royal & Twyford Abbey station that closed in 1931? Whilst closed many years before I was born, I do remember a footbridge over the tracks as a kid at this location, which survived into the 1950s. Don't know when it was removed though.
The old station was accessed from Twyford Abbey Road.
|
|
|
Post by Dmitri on Jan 15, 2011 14:58:20 GMT
However, do you mean the old Park Royal & Twyford Abbey station that closed in 1931? It was my first thought, too. According to the informed source, no traces of it has left to the day.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2011 17:17:53 GMT
Confirm - nothing there - unless anything in the undergrowth but doubt it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2011 17:22:44 GMT
It's strange they never built an interchange with the Central line.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2011 17:56:41 GMT
It's been on the cards for many years but nobody has bitten the bullet. There was talk more recently when the new office development was built on the Guinness site.
I suppose it's a case of "who will pay?"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2011 19:53:57 GMT
I suppose it's a case of "who will pay?" Basically yes, as I understand it. I guess that such a scheme would have to be developer-funded.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,443
|
Post by Chris M on Jan 16, 2011 11:46:01 GMT
Wasn't there an issue with HMRI complaining about the curves on one of the lines, meaning there wouldn't be a direct interchange, but something along the lines of Wood Lane-White City distance?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2011 12:10:03 GMT
You may be right about the curves, but I personally didn't know about it.
Heading in the eastbound direction the Piccadilly Line makes a gentle right-hand curve. The Central Line passing underneath is as good as dead straight.
The 'interchange' would indeed be a similar distance to White City - Wood Lane. Couldn't imagine a dedicated interchange being provided.
There are far more places on the network where there are sharper curves - with stations or not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2011 12:20:20 GMT
Adding a littler more, the Picc Line's gentle right hand curve starts from a short distance beyond the east end of where the closed Park Royal & Twyford Abbey station was, right through to the approach to North Ealing. It then curves gently left into North Ealing station.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jan 16, 2011 12:47:58 GMT
There are far more places on the network where there are sharper curves - with stations or not. My understanding is that although existing curved platforms can remain in use, new platforms have to be straight, so an interchange at the point where Piccadilly and Central cross would not be allowed unless the Picadilly's track were to be realigned.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2011 13:27:45 GMT
OK. Thank you for that.
|
|
|
Post by younglulnerd on Jan 16, 2011 13:33:34 GMT
I thought it wasn't built because you can't have new platforms on an incline, which the track after the existing station are...
Thats what I read on a website (abandoned stations, methinks)...
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jan 16, 2011 16:21:54 GMT
My understanding is that although existing curved platforms can remain in use, new platforms have to be straight, so an interchange at the point where Piccadilly and Central cross would not be allowed unless the Piccadilly's track were to be realigned. Amazing therefore that the aforementioned Wood Lane was able to be opened, being on a tighter curve.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2011 23:34:24 GMT
Park Royal & Twyford Abbey came up in one of the magazines many years ago. When I was commuting in the late 70s I was able to pick out the remains of some brickwork on the northeast side of the line just south of Twyford Abbey Road which I took to be from the station. They were well back up by the boundary fence and only two or three courses of brick. They could well have become buried in the last thirty odd years.
Andy
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Jan 17, 2011 0:18:36 GMT
Do extensions to platforms need to be on a straight track, or can they follow the existing grade/curve?
Utterly stupid rule, as if there werent enough obstacles in improving public transport.
|
|
hobbayne
RIP John Lennon and George Harrison
Posts: 516
|
Post by hobbayne on Jan 17, 2011 14:17:05 GMT
Park Royal & Twyford Abbey came up in one of the magazines many years ago. When I was commuting in the late 70s I was able to pick out the remains of some brickwork on the northeast side of the line just south of Twyford Abbey Road which I took to be from the station. They were well back up by the boundary fence and only two or three courses of brick. They could well have become buried in the last thirty odd years. Andy There is a small stump of the eastbound platform left, if you look out of the left land side of the train, as soon as you cross the twyford road bridge you will see a childrens playgound. Immediatly after that if you look carefully enough you might be lucky to see it!
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Jan 17, 2011 19:58:56 GMT
Do extensions to platforms need to be on a straight track, or can they follow the existing grade/curve? Utterly stupid rule, as if there werent enough obstacles in improving public transport. I don't know; I *think* that younglulnerd is right in saying that new platforms must be straight (very un PC, really - ha ha). It does seem very strange - do they honestly think that all the curved platforms are suddenly going to disappear?!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2011 20:14:04 GMT
do they honestly think that all the curved platforms are suddenly going to disappear?! I wouldn't Bank on that.
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Jan 17, 2011 20:21:06 GMT
do they honestly think that all the curved platforms are suddenly going to disappear?! I wouldn't Bank on that. *groan* ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2011 20:26:16 GMT
Going back to the subject of Wood Lane, it would certainly have been interesting if it had been necessary to straighten the H&C tracks before constructing the new station!! ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2011 20:43:16 GMT
It does seem very strange - do they honestly think that all the curved platforms are suddenly going to disappear?! Agreed You can also legally drive and be a passenger in a car without a seatbelt if it's so old it was originally built without them (although you can't have a child as a passenger without a belt under any circumstances). Where does the rule regarding straight platforms on new stations originate from and what year did it come into force?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2011 18:22:37 GMT
Where does the rule regarding straight platforms on new stations originate from and what year did it come into force? I'll have to pass on exactly which bit of legislation, but I believe it comes down to interpretation of what is meant by reasonably practicable in the quote at www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.1136 "Under current health and safety law, railway operators should reduce the risk from gaps as low as is reasonably practicable." Also, "When new railways are being constructed, we now expect that passenger access to train coaches to be as near as possible step-free." LU uses the nice acronym PTI - Platform Train Interface for such issues.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2011 22:36:47 GMT
LU uses the nice acronym PTI - Platform Train Interface for such issues. They're getting more and more like Microsoft each day, and I have to listen to their **** in increasing and unwanted intervals. "Platform Train Interface".........bring me the head of the moron who thought up this alternative to "Door".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2011 23:00:02 GMT
LU uses the nice acronym PTI - Platform Train Interface for such issues. They're getting more and more like Microsoft each day, and I have to listen to their **** in increasing and unwanted intervals. "Platform Train Interface".........bring me the head of the moron who thought up this alternative to "Door". Actually I think it is a rather sensible name. Bear in mind it doesn't just cover the doors, but where you put yer boots, accessibility, PEDs, etc etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2011 3:00:48 GMT
They're getting more and more like Microsoft each day, and I have to listen to their **** in increasing and unwanted intervals. "Platform Train Interface".........bring me the head of the moron who thought up this alternative to "Door". Actually I think it is a rather sensible name. Bear in mind it doesn't just cover the doors, but where you put yer boots, accessibility, PEDs, etc etc. I suppose so. I'm off to my Horizontal Sleep System (HSS) now.
|
|