I complained in a post here, just after the Elizabeth Line opened, of the poor signposting throughout, and especially the really awful connection between EL and tube lines at Tottenham Court Road.

Yesterday diamondgeezer.blogspot.com wrote "The Evil Arrows of Tottenham Court Road". It appears that the 9 connecting passageways are nominally one-way only, though the extremely wide corridors and low passenger numbers mean that this never in practice justified. I have, since my initial experiences, been avoiding the EL and people tell me that passenger numbers are still low.

It looks from the diagrams posted on https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-station-tuvw-14744/
that the eastern end of the EL platforms is very close to the Northern Line, and the western end close to the Central Line, but it's rather hard to see whether there really are connections there (and the only diagram I could find was drawn years before the EL opened).

The official signposting at TCR from EL to Central takes you all the way to the surface, through two ticket gates, and then back down, which is really stupid.

Next time I go there I'll try to find out whether there really are any connection but they are not signposted, or whether the designers simply forgot to cater for those changing lines at TCR. As far as I can see, the entire design of the EL is based on mainline rail principles. The first rule in the designer's book seems to be to make connections to tube and other rail lines as tortuous as possible. TfL then compound this by refusing to do sensible signposting at their stations. There seems a huge contrast to the way the Victoria Line was laid out - where at many interchanges such as Stockwell, Oxford Circus, Highbury & Islington, there is a very short cross-platform link from Victoria line to the one most likely to be popular.

--
Clive Page

Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> wrote:
> I complained in a post here, just after the Elizabeth Line opened, of the
> poor signposting throughout, and especially the really awful connection
> between EL and tube lines at Tottenham Court Road.
>
> Yesterday diamondgeezer.blogspot.com wrote "The Evil Arrows of Tottenham
> Court Road". It appears that the 9 connecting passageways are nominally
> one-way only, though the extremely wide corridors and low passenger
> numbers mean that this never in practice justified. I have, since my
> initial experiences, been avoiding the EL and people tell me that
> passenger numbers are still low.
>
> It looks from the diagrams posted on
> https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/3d-maps-of-every-underground-station-tuvw-14744/
> that the eastern end of the EL platforms is very close to the Northern
> Line, and the western end close to the Central Line, but it's rather hard
> to see whether there really are connections there (and the only diagram I
> could find was drawn years before the EL opened).

Yes, there are direct connections at low level between the EL and NL. I've
already posted about them, with illustrations.

>
> The official signposting at TCR from EL to Central takes you all the way
> to the surface, through two ticket gates, and then back down, which is really stupid.

It's not stupid at all. It's a much shorter, simpler route for passengers
than the (non-signposted) underground route. I've done them both.

>
> Next time I go there I'll try to find out whether there really are any
> connection but they are not signposted, or whether the designers simply
> forgot to cater for those changing lines at TCR.

I can guarantee that there are connections. The route to the Northern Line
is clearly signposted; just because you failed to see the clear signs
doesn't mean they weren't there:
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/52165606325/in/album-72177720299998834/>

And it's step-free, too:
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/52164092987/in/album-72177720299998834/>

And, from there, the slightly convoluted route to the Central Line is
signposted. But the escalator route between the EL and CL via the ticket
hall is far better: quicker, simpler, much less walking, no steps.

This is part of the much longer underground route to the Central Line:
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/52165383734/in/album-72177720299998834/>

> As far as I can see, the entire design of the EL is based on mainline
> rail principles. The first rule in the designer's book seems to be to
> make connections to tube and other rail lines as tortuous as possible.

The opposite is true. An underground route to the Central Line would
involve a long up-down walk, which you would complain about even more if
that's what was on offer. Have you tried the equivalent long underground
routes to the Northern Line at Moorgate and the Bakerloo at Paddington?

And, btw, there will be an underground walking route between the EL and CL
at Bond Street, but it involves another, very long, underground passage.

In any case, given that they parallel each other between there and
Stratford, will many people need to interchange between the intermediate CL
and EL ststions? The much more important interchanges are with the lines
that cross the EL at just one station.

> TfL then compound this by refusing to do sensible signposting at their
> stations. There seems a huge contrast to the way the Victoria Line was
> laid out - where at many interchanges such as Stockwell, Oxford Circus,
> Highbury & Islington, there is a very short cross-platform link from
> Victoria line to the one most likely to be popular.

Yes, the Victoria line has some excellent cross-passage connections, but I
don't think that those would have been possible here. Even the Jubilee Line
largely lacks them (eg, at Green Park, Waterloo and London Bridge).

For one thing, those involve the new line taking over one platform tunnel
from the old line. That's hardly an option with the EL. It would also
require extended line closures of the Central Line through central London.
How would you defend those?

"Recliner" <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:td56cr$2fgsh$2@dont-email.me...
>> The official signposting at TCR from EL to Central takes you all the way
>> to the surface, through two ticket gates, and then back down, which is
>> really stupid.
>
> It's not stupid at all. It's a much shorter, simpler route for passengers
> than the (non-signposted) underground route. I've done them both.

Depends on what factors are most important. Not needing to climb to the
surface and then descend to a different level (by escalator), and not
needing to negotiate the pinch-points of two gatelines, may will save time,
even if the distance to be walked is be greater.

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "Recliner" <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:td56cr$2fgsh$2@dont-email.me...
>>> The official signposting at TCR from EL to Central takes you all the way
>>> to the surface, through two ticket gates, and then back down, which is
>>> really stupid.
>>
>> It's not stupid at all. It's a much shorter, simpler route for passengers
>> than the (non-signposted) underground route. I've done them both.
>
> Depends on what factors are most important. Not needing to climb to the
> surface

You don't climb to the surface. The signposted link is at the mezzanine
ticket hall level, an escalator ride down from the surface.

> and then descend to a different level (by escalator), and not
> needing to negotiate the pinch-points of two gatelines, may will save time,
> even if the distance to be walked is be greater.

Trust me, it wouldn't. The escalators up and down require minimal walking,
and there are plenty of gates. It would require a much longer walk, and two
staircases or escalators if a new direct link was at a lower level.
Building that link would probably have required extended closures of the
Central Line, or at least its TCR station.

It would be instructive to compare it with Green Park, where the best links
between the Piccadilly and Jubilee/Victoria lines are via the sub-surface
ticket hall, not the long up-down lower level passages.

And I'm still unclear why large numbers of people would need to interchange
at intermediate stations between lines that parallel each other from Ealing
Broadway to Stratford?

"Recliner" <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:td57mg$2fkqs$2@dont-email.me...
> NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> "Recliner" <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:td56cr$2fgsh$2@dont-email.me...
>>>> The official signposting at TCR from EL to Central takes you all the
>>>> way
>>>> to the surface, through two ticket gates, and then back down, which is
>>>> really stupid.
>>>
>>> It's not stupid at all. It's a much shorter, simpler route for
>>> passengers
>>> than the (non-signposted) underground route. I've done them both.
>>
>> Depends on what factors are most important. Not needing to climb to the
>> surface
>
> You don't climb to the surface. The signposted link is at the mezzanine
> ticket hall level, an escalator ride down from the surface.

Ah, I was taking as gospel the earlier statement "The official signposting
at TCR from EL to Central takes you all the way to the surface"

>> and then descend to a different level (by escalator), and not
>> needing to negotiate the pinch-points of two gatelines, may will save
>> time,
>> even if the distance to be walked is be greater.
>
> Trust me, it wouldn't. The escalators up and down require minimal walking,
> and there are plenty of gates. It would require a much longer walk, and
> two
> staircases or escalators if a new direct link was at a lower level.
> Building that link would probably have required extended closures of the
> Central Line, or at least its TCR station.

Again, I was taking as gospel "the (non-signposted) underground route. I've
done them both" which suggests that a link already exists, even if it may
not be the best route to use.

Half the problem is the need to go out of one set of gates and in through
another set. You'd think that once you are "airside" you should be able to
change between any of the lines that a station serves without having to go
"landside" again.

I can't comment on TCR post-Crossrail because I haven't been to London for
about 10 years, but I remember in the past when I used to go every few
weeks, it was infuriating at some stations to have to go out and back simply
to change lines, or when changing from the up to the down platform.

I remember seeing a book that someone had produced which showed the
shortcuts between lines at various stations, either to avoid an indirect
official route or else to use a route that was used by fewer passengers so
the escalators and passageways were less clogged.

It's a shame that the "stand on the right" (and overtake on the left) rule
for LT escalators hasn't been adopted for all escalators - eg in shops. Very
often in department stores I find two people standing side by side so
preventing anyone overtaking. When I'm going down an escalator I usually
walk down so as to get there quicker (escalator speed plus walking speed)
than the time it takes for the escalator alone to move.

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "Recliner" <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:td57mg$2fkqs$2@dont-email.me...
>> NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>> "Recliner" <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:td56cr$2fgsh$2@dont-email.me...
>>>>> The official signposting at TCR from EL to Central takes you all the
>>>>> way
>>>>> to the surface, through two ticket gates, and then back down, which is
>>>>> really stupid.
>>>>
>>>> It's not stupid at all. It's a much shorter, simpler route for
>>>> passengers
>>>> than the (non-signposted) underground route. I've done them both.
>>>
>>> Depends on what factors are most important. Not needing to climb to the
>>> surface
>>
>> You don't climb to the surface. The signposted link is at the mezzanine
>> ticket hall level, an escalator ride down from the surface.
>
> Ah, I was taking as gospel the earlier statement "The official signposting
> at TCR from EL to Central takes you all the way to the surface"
>
>
>>> and then descend to a different level (by escalator), and not
>>> needing to negotiate the pinch-points of two gatelines, may will save
>>> time,
>>> even if the distance to be walked is be greater.
>>
>> Trust me, it wouldn't. The escalators up and down require minimal walking,
>> and there are plenty of gates. It would require a much longer walk, and
>> two
>> staircases or escalators if a new direct link was at a lower level.
>> Building that link would probably have required extended closures of the
>> Central Line, or at least its TCR station.
>
> Again, I was taking as gospel "the (non-signposted) underground route. I've
> done them both" which suggests that a link already exists, even if it may
> not be the best route to use.

Yes, as I said, a route does exist, and I've done it, but I really don't
recommend it, and it's quite rightly not signposted. It involves taking the
direct, signposted route to the Northern Line, walking along the platform,
then taking the rather convoluted signposted route to the Central Line. The
signposted route is far better.

>
>
> Half the problem is the need to go out of one set of gates and in through
> another set. You'd think that once you are "airside" you should be able to
> change between any of the lines that a station serves without having to go
> "landside" again.

It's not really a problem.

For example, it's the signposted route between the eastbound Met and the
Elizabeth Line at Farringdon. You go up to street level, go out of the
station, cross Cowcross Street, enter the NR station and proceed down to
the EL. It's even worse at Hammersmith, where you have to cross a very
busy road between the two LU stations. And, at Canary Wharf, it's quite a
hike between stations, by a not-very-obvious route. And if using the DLR,
make sure you touch in/out.

>
> I can't comment on TCR post-Crossrail because I haven't been to London for
> about 10 years, but I remember in the past when I used to go every few
> weeks, it was infuriating at some stations to have to go out and back simply
> to change lines, or when changing from the up to the down platform.

There's only a few such interchanges, and at least it costs you nothing.
>
>
> I remember seeing a book that someone had produced which showed the
> shortcuts between lines at various stations, either to avoid an indirect
> official route or else to use a route that was used by fewer passengers so
> the escalators and passageways were less clogged.

There are online resources now for that sort of thing.

>
> It's a shame that the "stand on the right" (and overtake on the left) rule
> for LT escalators hasn't been adopted for all escalators - eg in shops. Very
> often in department stores I find two people standing side by side so
> preventing anyone overtaking. When I'm going down an escalator I usually
> walk down so as to get there quicker (escalator speed plus walking speed)
> than the time it takes for the escalator alone to move.
>

Outside LU, I find most people don't walk up or down escalators at all, so
it's usually not a problem if people block the left side.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>>
>> It's a shame that the "stand on the right" (and overtake on the left) rule
>> for LT escalators hasn't been adopted for all escalators - eg in shops. Very
>> often in department stores I find two people standing side by side so
>> preventing anyone overtaking. When I'm going down an escalator I usually
>> walk down so as to get there quicker (escalator speed plus walking speed)
>> than the time it takes for the escalator alone to move.
>>
>
> Outside LU, I find most people don't walk up or down escalators at all, so
> it's usually not a problem if people block the left side.
>
It’s a shambles in Glasgow. Partick is one way round and Central Low Level
the other. And yes, people do try to walk them. Both are NR owned.

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>> It's a shame that the "stand on the right" (and overtake on the left) rule
>>> for LT escalators hasn't been adopted for all escalators - eg in shops. Very
>>> often in department stores I find two people standing side by side so
>>> preventing anyone overtaking. When I'm going down an escalator I usually
>>> walk down so as to get there quicker (escalator speed plus walking speed)
>>> than the time it takes for the escalator alone to move.
>>>
>>
>> Outside LU, I find most people don't walk up or down escalators at all, so
>> it's usually not a problem if people block the left side.
>>
> It’s a shambles in Glasgow. Partick is one way round and Central Low Level
> the other. And yes, people do try to walk them. Both are NR owned.

In Japan, each city has its own convention, with Osaka being the opposite
to Tokyo. And, Japan being Japan, everyone rigorously follows the local
rule.

"Recliner" <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:td6bqr$2j7ib$2@dont-email.me...
> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's a shame that the "stand on the right" (and overtake on the left)
>>>> rule
>>>> for LT escalators hasn't been adopted for all escalators - eg in shops.
>>>> Very
>>>> often in department stores I find two people standing side by side so
>>>> preventing anyone overtaking. When I'm going down an escalator I
>>>> usually
>>>> walk down so as to get there quicker (escalator speed plus walking
>>>> speed)
>>>> than the time it takes for the escalator alone to move.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Outside LU, I find most people don't walk up or down escalators at all,
>>> so
>>> it's usually not a problem if people block the left side.
>>>
>> It’s a shambles in Glasgow. Partick is one way round and Central Low
>> Level
>> the other. And yes, people do try to walk them. Both are NR owned.
>
> In Japan, each city has its own convention, with Osaka being the opposite
> to Tokyo. And, Japan being Japan, everyone rigorously follows the local
> rule.

I'm surprised different stations in Glasgow, and different cities in Japan,
have their own local conventions. You'd think that a universal standard
would be imposed, like a universal rail gauge, to avoid people having to
remember which rule applied in that location.

I think I remember reading that a lot of the left-hand drive countries in
Europe use the same stand-on-the-right convention adopted by the London
Transport, so the convention isn't reversed depending on which side of the
road cars drive on. It makes sense for the convention to be independent of
driving side, because it is based on the majority of people being
right-handed and therefore the standing people wanting to hold onto the
handrail with their dominant hand and step off the escalator with their
dominant foot. Not that I've ever given a second thought to which foot I
step off with, because I never stand still on an escalator but always walk
up the left hand side to get there quicker, so it depends which foot happens
by chance to be on the step which reaches the top of the escalator. And it
pisses me off no end on a non-LT escalator when people stand side by side
and block me from walking up/down.

On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 20:05:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
<recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's a shame that the "stand on the right" (and overtake on the left) rule
>>>> for LT escalators hasn't been adopted for all escalators - eg in shops. Very
>>>> often in department stores I find two people standing side by side so
>>>> preventing anyone overtaking. When I'm going down an escalator I usually
>>>> walk down so as to get there quicker (escalator speed plus walking speed)
>>>> than the time it takes for the escalator alone to move.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Outside LU, I find most people don't walk up or down escalators at all, so
>>> it's usually not a problem if people block the left side.
>>>
>> It’s a shambles in Glasgow. Partick is one way round and Central Low Level
>> the other. And yes, people do try to walk them. Both are NR owned.
>
>In Japan, each city has its own convention, with Osaka being the opposite
>to Tokyo. And, Japan being Japan, everyone rigorously follows the local
>rule.

So long as there is a convention, and it's fairly obvious from observation
(which it will be if there are people standing at all), then it doesn't make
any difference what the convention is - you just follow it. It's when
there's no convention, and people stand randomly, that it gets annoying. And
even more so when people block the entire width and you can't walk past them
at all.

Mark

Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 20:05:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a shame that the "stand on the right" (and overtake on the left) rule
>>>>> for LT escalators hasn't been adopted for all escalators - eg in shops. Very
>>>>> often in department stores I find two people standing side by side so
>>>>> preventing anyone overtaking. When I'm going down an escalator I usually
>>>>> walk down so as to get there quicker (escalator speed plus walking speed)
>>>>> than the time it takes for the escalator alone to move.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Outside LU, I find most people don't walk up or down escalators at all, so
>>>> it's usually not a problem if people block the left side.
>>>>
>>> It’s a shambles in Glasgow. Partick is one way round and Central Low Level
>>> the other. And yes, people do try to walk them. Both are NR owned.
>>
>> In Japan, each city has its own convention, with Osaka being the opposite
>> to Tokyo. And, Japan being Japan, everyone rigorously follows the local
>> rule.
>
> So long as there is a convention, and it's fairly obvious from observation
> (which it will be if there are people standing at all), then it doesn't make
> any difference what the convention is - you just follow it. It's when
> there's no convention, and people stand randomly, that it gets annoying. And
> even more so when people block the entire width and you can't walk past them
> at all.
>

From memory (I'll have to check my old photos), the escalator steps in
Osaka have some sort of signs or colour coding to remind people of the
reversed convention.

In message <td6drv$2jds7$2@dont-email.me>, at 20:40:32 on Fri, 12 Aug
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>> So long as there is a convention, and it's fairly obvious from observation
>> (which it will be if there are people standing at all), then it doesn't make
>> any difference what the convention is - you just follow it. It's when
>> there's no convention, and people stand randomly, that it gets annoying. And
>> even more so when people block the entire width and you can't walk past them
>> at all.
>
>From memory (I'll have to check my old photos), the escalator steps in
>Osaka have some sort of signs or colour coding to remind people of the
>reversed convention.

Lots of stairs across the national rail network (as well as TfL) have
signage on the steps themselves.

Most people ignore it, because, them getting off the train and to the
exit is far more important than allowing passengers access to the
platforms to catch the train which just arrived.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 21:24:07 +0100, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:

>On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 20:05:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
><recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a shame that the "stand on the right" (and overtake on the left) rule
>>>>> for LT escalators hasn't been adopted for all escalators - eg in shops. Very
>>>>> often in department stores I find two people standing side by side so
>>>>> preventing anyone overtaking. When I'm going down an escalator I usually
>>>>> walk down so as to get there quicker (escalator speed plus walking speed)
>>>>> than the time it takes for the escalator alone to move.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Outside LU, I find most people don't walk up or down escalators at all, so
>>>> it's usually not a problem if people block the left side.
>>>>
>>> It’s a shambles in Glasgow. Partick is one way round and Central Low Level
>>> the other. And yes, people do try to walk them. Both are NR owned.
>>
>>In Japan, each city has its own convention, with Osaka being the opposite
>>to Tokyo. And, Japan being Japan, everyone rigorously follows the local
>>rule.
>
>So long as there is a convention, and it's fairly obvious from observation
>(which it will be if there are people standing at all), then it doesn't make
>any difference what the convention is - you just follow it. It's when
>there's no convention, and people stand randomly, that it gets annoying. And
>even more so when people block the entire width and you can't walk past them
>at all.

It's even more complicated than I thought, a little like Glasgow:

<https://www.getaroundjapan.jp/archives/4730>

However, it seems I'm out of date: Osaka has apparently switched to standing on the left, walking on the right, like
most Japanese cities:

<https://muza-chan.net/japan/index.php/blog/osaka-right-side-escalator-etiquette>