Discussion:
Heathrow T5 Transit photos
(too old to reply)
Recliner
2017-03-24 13:11:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
For anyone who's interested, I've uploaded a set of photos I took
recently of the underground railway that links Heathrow T5 and its two
satellite terminals. The rubber-tyred railway isn't visible to anyone
not using the satellites.

The two satellites are mainly used by long-haul, wide-body flights
(most European flights use the main terminal):

https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157679819076761
Offramp
2017-03-24 20:05:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Wow, thanks for those pics. It reminds me of Total Recall.
Richard J.
2017-03-24 21:40:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
For anyone who's interested, I've uploaded a set of photos I took
recently of the underground railway that links Heathrow T5 and its two
satellite terminals. The rubber-tyred railway isn't visible to anyone
not using the satellites.
The two satellites are mainly used by long-haul, wide-body flights
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157679819076761
Thanks for the photos.

I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the longest
in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.

It's slightly frustrating not to have an external view of these
rubber-tyred trains (trams?), but I guess that's not possible for the
public. Apparently they look like this:
Loading Image...
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)
Recliner
2017-03-24 22:13:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard J.
Post by Recliner
For anyone who's interested, I've uploaded a set of photos I took
recently of the underground railway that links Heathrow T5 and its two
satellite terminals. The rubber-tyred railway isn't visible to anyone
not using the satellites.
The two satellites are mainly used by long-haul, wide-body flights
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157679819076761
Thanks for the photos.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the longest
in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
It's slightly frustrating not to have an external view of these
rubber-tyred trains (trams?), but I guess that's not possible for the
http://www.bombardier.com/content/dam/Websites/bombardiercom/Projects/innovia-apm-200-automated-people-mover-london-3310.jpg/_jcr_content/renditions/cq5dam.web.750.750.jpeg
Yes, that looks right. From memory, I think the trains have four (or five)
carriages. The much more visible elevated Gatwick inter-terminal shuttle
trains have three carriages.

Unlike the Gatwick shuttle, there are points, so trains can switch track,
and the number of trains isnt limited to two. There's obvious scope for the
line to be extended to a future third satellite or linked to a rebuilt
central terminal.

One thing that may or not be obvious from the pics is that the Transit is
very clean and well maintained; it still looks brand new, despite being
almost a decade old.
Roland Perry
2017-03-25 07:13:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<779741030.512085610.195722.recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-septe
mber.org>, at 22:13:51 on Fri, 24 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Unlike the Gatwick shuttle, there are points, so trains can switch track,
and the number of trains isnt limited to two.
In both cases like the shuttle at Stansted, or thinking back a long way
the inter-terminal shuttle at DFW back in the 80's. May be still there.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-25 09:11:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
In message
mber.org>, at 22:13:51 on Fri, 24 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Unlike the Gatwick shuttle, there are points, so trains can switch track,
and the number of trains isnt limited to two.
In both cases like the shuttle at Stansted, or thinking back a long way
the inter-terminal shuttle at DFW back in the 80's. May be still there.
No, the Gatwick shuttle is different: it's simply two unconnected shuttle
lines, with no switches or crossovers. Each line has its own train that
simply shuttles backwards and forwards, so there are a maximum of two
trains. In Stansted, there are separate up and down lines, and the number
of trains isn't limited by the layout. The Heathrow T5 system can work in
either mode.
Roland Perry
2017-03-25 09:41:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<2011759759.512125567.439046.recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-sept
ember.org>, at 09:11:51 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Unlike the Gatwick shuttle, there are points, so trains can switch track,
and the number of trains isnt limited to two.
In both cases like the shuttle at Stansted, or thinking back a long way
the inter-terminal shuttle at DFW back in the 80's. May be still there.
No,
Yes ... Stansted and DFW "both have" points for trains to switch tracks,
and not limited to two trains.
Post by Recliner
the Gatwick shuttle is different: it's simply two unconnected shuttle
lines, with no switches or crossovers. Each line has its own train that
simply shuttles backwards and forwards, so there are a maximum of two
trains. In Stansted, there are separate up and down lines, and the number
of trains isn't limited by the layout. The Heathrow T5 system can work in
either mode.
--
Roland Perry
s***@potato.field
2017-03-25 21:31:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 22:13:51 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Yes, that looks right. From memory, I think the trains have four (or five)
carriages. The much more visible elevated Gatwick inter-terminal shuttle
trains have three carriages.
Unlike the Gatwick shuttle, there are points, so trains can switch track,
and the number of trains isnt limited to two. There's obvious scope for the
line to be extended to a future third satellite or linked to a rebuilt
central terminal.
One thing that may or not be obvious from the pics is that the Transit is
very clean and well maintained; it still looks brand new, despite being
almost a decade old.
I wonder where "people mover" ends and metro train begins? These vehicles
seem to be in that grey area somewhere in between though the VAL metros
in france are pretty much the same except ridiculously narrow (presumably
for tunneling cost reasons).
--
Spud
Recliner
2017-03-25 21:46:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@potato.field
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 22:13:51 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Yes, that looks right. From memory, I think the trains have four (or five)
carriages. The much more visible elevated Gatwick inter-terminal shuttle
trains have three carriages.
Unlike the Gatwick shuttle, there are points, so trains can switch track,
and the number of trains isnt limited to two. There's obvious scope for the
line to be extended to a future third satellite or linked to a rebuilt
central terminal.
One thing that may or not be obvious from the pics is that the Transit is
very clean and well maintained; it still looks brand new, despite being
almost a decade old.
I wonder where "people mover" ends and metro train begins? These vehicles
seem to be in that grey area somewhere in between though the VAL metros
in france are pretty much the same except ridiculously narrow (presumably
for tunneling cost reasons).
I'd say this is at the people mover end of the spectrum.

But I wouldn't say it was ridiculously narrow:
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/33493259211/in/photostream/lightbox/>

One limiting factor on tunnel size is that they have to bear the weight of
575 tonne A380s a few metres above.
s***@potato.field
2017-03-25 22:01:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 21:46:40 -0000 (UTC)
Post by Recliner
Post by s***@potato.field
I wonder where "people mover" ends and metro train begins? These vehicles
seem to be in that grey area somewhere in between though the VAL metros
in france are pretty much the same except ridiculously narrow (presumably
for tunneling cost reasons).
I'd say this is at the people mover end of the spectrum.
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/33493259211/in/photostream/lightbox/>
No, not the T5 one - I was refering the the VAL systems. Even narrower than
a tube train (though higher) and the one in toulouse in the rush hour was not
a pleasent experience.
--
Spud
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 08:30:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<1251975418.512170937.836841.recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-sept
ember.org>, at 21:46:40 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
One limiting factor on tunnel size is that they have to bear the weight of
575 tonne A380s a few metres above.
You've not seen the highway tunnels with their portals only metres away
from the runways at Schiphol? https://goo.gl/maps/K5NbbmjqqL42
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-26 08:56:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
In message
ember.org>, at 21:46:40 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
One limiting factor on tunnel size is that they have to bear the weight of
575 tonne A380s a few metres above.
You've not seen the highway tunnels with their portals only metres away
from the runways at Schiphol? https://goo.gl/maps/K5NbbmjqqL42
Seen and travelled through them.
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 09:15:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<1074621208.512211079.274500.recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-sept
ember.org>, at 08:56:48 on Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
One limiting factor on tunnel size is that they have to bear the weight of
575 tonne A380s a few metres above.
You've not seen the highway tunnels with their portals only metres away
from the runways at Schiphol? https://goo.gl/maps/K5NbbmjqqL42
Seen and travelled through them.
Good. You'll therefore note that much wider and much shallower tunnels
don't collapse under the weight of huge planes.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-26 09:32:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
In message
ember.org>, at 08:56:48 on Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
One limiting factor on tunnel size is that they have to bear the weight of
575 tonne A380s a few metres above.
You've not seen the highway tunnels with their portals only metres away
from the runways at Schiphol? https://goo.gl/maps/K5NbbmjqqL42
Seen and travelled through them.
Good. You'll therefore note that much wider and much shallower tunnels
don't collapse under the weight of huge planes.
Yes, I do have engineering degrees, and am familiar with the concept of
load-bearing beams. But the greater the span, the deeper the beams.

Incidentally, CDG also has public vehicle and passenger tunnels under
taxiways. And Heathrow has a lot more vehicle and rail tunnels than the
public ones from the M4 and A4 to the central area.
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 10:50:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<1700930280.512213353.538481.recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-sept
ember.org>, at 09:32:59 on Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
ember.org>, at 08:56:48 on Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
One limiting factor on tunnel size is that they have to bear the weight of
575 tonne A380s a few metres above.
You've not seen the highway tunnels with their portals only metres away
from the runways at Schiphol? https://goo.gl/maps/K5NbbmjqqL42
Seen and travelled through them.
Good. You'll therefore note that much wider and much shallower tunnels
don't collapse under the weight of huge planes.
Yes, I do have engineering degrees,
You don't need an engineering degree to see there isn't a Jumbo jet in a
big hole over the tunnel!
Post by Recliner
and am familiar with the concept of
load-bearing beams. But the greater the span, the deeper the beams.
Incidentally, CDG also has public vehicle and passenger tunnels under
taxiways.
So does AMS also have those. The one above is under a runway.
Post by Recliner
And Heathrow has a lot more vehicle and rail tunnels than the
public ones from the M4 and A4 to the central area.
It does, but this subthread is only about the people mover.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 08:25:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by s***@potato.field
I wonder where "people mover" ends and metro train begins?
The newish system at CDG is pretty long.

Perhaps a working definition might be "is more than half serving outside
of the airport perimeter fence"?
--
Roland Perry
Basil Jet
2017-03-26 12:20:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by s***@potato.field
I wonder where "people mover" ends and metro train begins?
The newish system at CDG is pretty long.
Perhaps a working definition might be "is more than half serving outside
of the airport perimeter fence"?
How about "Does a single facility account for the majority of passengers
at all of the stations except one?"
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 13:16:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Roland Perry
Post by s***@potato.field
I wonder where "people mover" ends and metro train begins?
The newish system at CDG is pretty long.
Perhaps a working definition might be "is more than half serving outside
of the airport perimeter fence"?
How about "Does a single facility account for the majority of
passengers at all of the stations except one?"
What do you mean by "single facility"? The CDG system connects
terminals, car parks, and the train stations. Traffic is spread fairly
evenly amongst them all.
--
Roland Perry
Basil Jet
2017-03-27 02:42:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Roland Perry
Post by s***@potato.field
I wonder where "people mover" ends and metro train begins?
The newish system at CDG is pretty long.
Perhaps a working definition might be "is more than half serving outside
of the airport perimeter fence"?
How about "Does a single facility account for the majority of
passengers at all of the stations except one?"
What do you mean by "single facility"? The CDG system connects
terminals, car parks, and the train stations. Traffic is spread fairly
evenly amongst them all.
Obviously CDG is a single facility. I can't believe you even asked.
They're not going to relocate the car parks to Corsica and leave the
airport where it is, are they?
Roland Perry
2017-03-27 07:13:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Roland Perry
Post by s***@potato.field
I wonder where "people mover" ends and metro train begins?
The newish system at CDG is pretty long.
Perhaps a working definition might be "is more than half serving outside
of the airport perimeter fence"?
How about "Does a single facility account for the majority of
passengers at all of the stations except one?"
What do you mean by "single facility"? The CDG system connects
terminals, car parks, and the train stations. Traffic is spread fairly
evenly amongst them all.
Obviously CDG is a single facility. I can't believe you even asked.
That's why I asked. I'd regard an airport terminal, a car park and a
train station as three separate facilities.
--
Roland Perry
John Levine
2017-03-25 01:38:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard J.
Post by Recliner
For anyone who's interested, I've uploaded a set of photos I took
recently of the underground railway that links Heathrow T5 and its two
satellite terminals. The rubber-tyred railway isn't visible to anyone
not using the satellites.
The two satellites are mainly used by long-haul, wide-body flights
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157679819076761
Thanks for the photos.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the longest
in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
It's slightly frustrating not to have an external view of these
rubber-tyred trains (trams?), but I guess that's not possible for the
public. Apparently they look like this: ...
Here's Bombardier's description.

http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/products-services/transportation-systems/automated-people-movers.html

They've installed larger systems with the same equipment at the
Dallas-Fort Worth and Phoenix airports in the U.S. I've ridden the
Dallas one.
Recliner
2017-03-25 01:58:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Levine
Post by Richard J.
Post by Recliner
For anyone who's interested, I've uploaded a set of photos I took
recently of the underground railway that links Heathrow T5 and its two
satellite terminals. The rubber-tyred railway isn't visible to anyone
not using the satellites.
The two satellites are mainly used by long-haul, wide-body flights
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157679819076761
Thanks for the photos.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the longest
in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
It's slightly frustrating not to have an external view of these
rubber-tyred trains (trams?), but I guess that's not possible for the
public. Apparently they look like this: ...
Here's Bombardier's description.
http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/products-services/transportation-systems/automated-people-movers.html
They've installed larger systems with the same equipment at the
Dallas-Fort Worth and Phoenix airports in the U.S. I've ridden the
Dallas one.
Yes, the current Heathrow T5 installation is quite modest: relatively
short, all underground, all within one terminal, flat and straight (apart
from the crossovers). But it's likely to grow as T2 expands, and again when
when (if) the third runway with associated terminal is built.

I've ridden the DFW system, but a long time ago, and almost certainly an
older generation of trains. Ditto Phoenix.
LHS1
2017-03-25 16:53:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Richard J.
Post by Recliner
For anyone who's interested, I've uploaded a set of photos I took
recently of the underground railway that links Heathrow T5 and its two
satellite terminals. The rubber-tyred railway isn't visible to anyone
not using the satellites.
The two satellites are mainly used by long-haul, wide-body flights
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157679819076761
Thanks for the photos.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the longest
in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
It's slightly frustrating not to have an external view of these
rubber-tyred trains (trams?), but I guess that's not possible for the
public. Apparently they look like this: ...
Here's Bombardier's description.
http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/products-services/transportation-systems/automated-people-movers.html
They've installed larger systems with the same equipment at the
Dallas-Fort Worth and Phoenix airports in the U.S. I've ridden the
Dallas one.
Yes, the current Heathrow T5 installation is quite modest: relatively
short, all underground, all within one terminal, flat and straight (apart
from the crossovers). But it's likely to grow as T2 expands, and again when
when (if) the third runway with associated terminal is built.
I've ridden the DFW system, but a long time ago, and almost certainly an
older generation of trains. Ditto Phoenix.
What are the prospects for PRT development at T5, or even to other
terminals?
Recliner
2017-03-25 17:25:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by LHS1
Post by Recliner
Post by John Levine
Post by Richard J.
Post by Recliner
For anyone who's interested, I've uploaded a set of photos I took
recently of the underground railway that links Heathrow T5 and its two
satellite terminals. The rubber-tyred railway isn't visible to anyone
not using the satellites.
The two satellites are mainly used by long-haul, wide-body flights
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157679819076761
Thanks for the photos.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the longest
in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
It's slightly frustrating not to have an external view of these
rubber-tyred trains (trams?), but I guess that's not possible for the
public. Apparently they look like this: ...
Here's Bombardier's description.
http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/products-services/transportation-systems/automated-people-movers.html
They've installed larger systems with the same equipment at the
Dallas-Fort Worth and Phoenix airports in the U.S. I've ridden the
Dallas one.
Yes, the current Heathrow T5 installation is quite modest: relatively
short, all underground, all within one terminal, flat and straight (apart
from the crossovers). But it's likely to grow as T2 expands, and again when
when (if) the third runway with associated terminal is built.
I've ridden the DFW system, but a long time ago, and almost certainly an
older generation of trains. Ditto Phoenix.
What are the prospects for PRT development at T5, or even to other
terminals?
Pretty low, I think. The current T5 PRT system was supposed to be the first
stage of a much bigger system to link all the terminals to the business car
parks, in order to reduce the number of shuttle buses. It might even have
been part of the planning conditions for T5. But I don't think anything has
been heard of such expansion plans since T5 opened.

A certain awol cynical member of this group predicted exactly that, and I'm
sad to say he appears to have been proved right. But I fear Mr Polson won't
be along shortly to say, "I told you so".
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 08:32:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<1916845537.512155184.880458.recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-sept
ember.org>, at 17:25:53 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by LHS1
What are the prospects for PRT development at T5, or even to other
terminals?
Pretty low, I think. The current T5 PRT system was supposed to be the first
stage of a much bigger system to link all the terminals to the business car
parks, in order to reduce the number of shuttle buses. It might even have
been part of the planning conditions for T5. But I don't think anything has
been heard of such expansion plans since T5 opened.
A certain awol cynical member of this group predicted exactly that, and I'm
sad to say he appears to have been proved right. But I fear Mr Polson won't
be along shortly to say, "I told you so".
That was one of the rare things where I agreed with him.

Stage 2 was supposed to be using the side tunnels reaching the central
terminals to get from the car parking adjacent to the perimeter fence.

Zilch.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-26 08:56:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
In message
ember.org>, at 17:25:53 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by LHS1
What are the prospects for PRT development at T5, or even to other
terminals?
Pretty low, I think. The current T5 PRT system was supposed to be the first
stage of a much bigger system to link all the terminals to the business car
parks, in order to reduce the number of shuttle buses. It might even have
been part of the planning conditions for T5. But I don't think anything has
been heard of such expansion plans since T5 opened.
A certain awol cynical member of this group predicted exactly that, and I'm
sad to say he appears to have been proved right. But I fear Mr Polson won't
be along shortly to say, "I told you so".
That was one of the rare things where I agreed with him.
Stage 2 was supposed to be using the side tunnels reaching the central
terminals to get from the car parking adjacent to the perimeter fence.
Zilch.
Yup. Those are the business car parks, which were supposed to be
PRT-connected like the T5 business car park. The central terminals' long
stay car park is under the 27R threshold, but I don't think they ever
proposed to connect that to the PRT system.
Basil Jet
2017-03-25 01:38:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard J.
Post by Recliner
For anyone who's interested, I've uploaded a set of photos I took
recently of the underground railway that links Heathrow T5 and its two
satellite terminals. The rubber-tyred railway isn't visible to anyone
not using the satellites.
The two satellites are mainly used by long-haul, wide-body flights
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157679819076761
Thanks for the photos.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the longest
in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
It's slightly frustrating not to have an external view of these
rubber-tyred trains (trams?), but I guess that's not possible for the
http://www.bombardier.com/content/dam/Websites/bombardiercom/Projects/innovia-apm-200-automated-people-mover-london-3310.jpg/_jcr_content/renditions/cq5dam.web.750.750.jpeg
Thanks. I wonder why they have head and tail lights?
Recliner
2017-03-25 01:50:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Richard J.
Post by Recliner
For anyone who's interested, I've uploaded a set of photos I took
recently of the underground railway that links Heathrow T5 and its two
satellite terminals. The rubber-tyred railway isn't visible to anyone
not using the satellites.
The two satellites are mainly used by long-haul, wide-body flights
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72157679819076761
Thanks for the photos.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the longest
in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
It's slightly frustrating not to have an external view of these
rubber-tyred trains (trams?), but I guess that's not possible for the
http://www.bombardier.com/content/dam/Websites/bombardiercom/Projects/innovia-apm-200-automated-people-mover-london-3310.jpg/_jcr_content/renditions/cq5dam.web.750.750.jpeg
Thanks. I wonder why they have head and tail lights?
Yes, I wondered that. Perhaps for the benefit of (rare) track workers?
John Levine
2017-03-25 02:10:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by Basil Jet
Thanks. I wonder why they have head and tail lights?
Yes, I wondered that. Perhaps for the benefit of (rare) track workers?
Probably because the same equipment runs outside in other places. The
Dallas-Fort Worth system is elevated, and the one in Phoenix is mostly
elevated other than an underpass under a freight railway.

Here's the DFW one: https://www.dfwairport.com/skylink/

Video of a ride on the PHX one:

Roland Perry
2017-03-25 09:39:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John Levine
Post by Recliner
Post by Basil Jet
Thanks. I wonder why they have head and tail lights?
Yes, I wondered that. Perhaps for the benefit of (rare) track workers?
Probably because the same equipment runs outside in other places. The
Dallas-Fort Worth system is elevated,
I'm pretty sure the original one was like a roller-coaster, at or below
ground level (see below) and diving under the roads. Only four terminals
then.

<https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/63/DFW_Airport_guide_map200
2.jpg>
--
Roland Perry
John Levine
2017-03-25 21:37:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by John Levine
Probably because the same equipment runs outside in other places. The
Dallas-Fort Worth system is elevated,
I'm pretty sure the original one was like a roller-coaster, at or below
ground level (see below) and diving under the roads. Only four terminals
then.
The old DFW system built by LTV used lots of small vehicles and tried
too hard to do too many things, e.g., goods trains to move baggage
between terminals, and was hard to adapt when they divided terminals
into landside and post-screening airside areas. Bits of the track are
still visible. It didn't help that LTV left the business so there was
nobody willing to maintain or upgrade it.

The new system is a train with a single circular route with all stops
airside. If you want to change terminals landside, there is an
ordinary rather slow bus.
Roland Perry
2017-03-25 07:16:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-25 09:31:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4. It's a very well-designed
terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a regular user of it, which I
don't think you are).

As for the length of the departures escalator, do you really think this
doesn't look very long?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/32808675503/in/album-72157679819076761/lightbox/

Here's another pic:
Loading Image...

It goes through the equivalent of five high floors:
<Loading Image...>

Loading Image...

The Wikipedia page claims, without attribution, that "the escalators are
also the longest in the United Kingdom, longer than those at Angel tube
station on the London Underground, which had held the title since 1992".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_tube_station#Escalators
Roland Perry
2017-03-25 10:08:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<1663731145.512125808.735610.recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-sept
ember.org>, at 09:31:13 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4.
"You should see the other guy" isn't very persuasive.
Post by Recliner
It's a very well-designed terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a
regular user of it, which I don't think you are).
I've flown in once (very long walk to immigration) and out once (not
such a long walk to the gate). Different triangular trips.
Post by Recliner
As for the length of the departures escalator, do you really think this
doesn't look very long?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/32808675503/in/album-72157679819076761/lightbox/
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2162/2307578958_56a8379188.jpg
<https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/w/images/b/b2/xHeathrow_terminal_5_section.jpg.pagespeed.ic.0TNbVhu1wB.jpg>
http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/london/heathrow_t5_rshp2008_concept4a.jpg
It doesn't *look* as long as the Angel one, or even the Gatwick bridge
from the North terminal.
Post by Recliner
The Wikipedia page claims, without attribution, that "the escalators are
also the longest in the United Kingdom, longer than those at Angel tube
station on the London Underground, which had held the title since 1992".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_tube_station#Escalators
What's your estimate of the height of the two airport ones (in metres).
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-25 10:39:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
In message
ember.org>, at 09:31:13 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4.
"You should see the other guy" isn't very persuasive.
Yes it is. I'm comparing it with other very large terminals that I've used
multiple times. Obviously there's less walking in small terminals.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
It's a very well-designed terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a
regular user of it, which I don't think you are).
I've flown in once (very long walk to immigration) and out once (not
such a long walk to the gate). Different triangular trips.
I use it several times a year, and have arrived and departed from all three
of the buildings. I've also used all the business and first class lounges.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
As for the length of the departures escalator, do you really think this
doesn't look very long?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/32808675503/in/album-72157679819076761/lightbox/
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2162/2307578958_56a8379188.jpg
<https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/w/images/b/b2/xHeathrow_terminal_5_section.jpg.pagespeed.ic.0TNbVhu1wB.jpg>
http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/london/heathrow_t5_rshp2008_concept4a.jpg
It doesn't *look* as long as the Angel one, or even the Gatwick bridge
from the North terminal.
It's comparable to, but almost certainly slightly longer than, Angel; it is
definitely much longer than the Gatwick bridge escalator (which starts a
bit higher, but only descends to first floor departures level, not deep
underground).
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
The Wikipedia page claims, without attribution, that "the escalators are
also the longest in the United Kingdom, longer than those at Angel tube
station on the London Underground, which had held the title since 1992".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_tube_station#Escalators
What's your estimate of the height of the two airport ones (in metres).
There's no point in my producing rough estimates of heights, but I've used
both the escalators in question multiple times in the last year or so, and
have no doubt which is longer.
Roland Perry
2017-03-25 10:54:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<607060990.512130421.299916.recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-septe
mber.org>, at 10:39:23 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
"You should see the other guy" isn't very persuasive.
Yes it is. I'm comparing it with other very large terminals that I've used
multiple times. Obviously there's less walking in small terminals.
Just because there are other badly designed (from the pedestrian's point
of view) terminals, doesn't excuse T5 from learning from those lessons.
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
It's a very well-designed terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a
regular user of it, which I don't think you are).
I've flown in once (very long walk to immigration) and out once (not
such a long walk to the gate). Different triangular trips.
I use it several times a year, and have arrived and departed from all three
of the buildings. I've also used all the business and first class lounges.
Maybe you are over-conditioned to these unnecessary route-marches.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-25 11:20:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
In message
mber.org>, at 10:39:23 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
"You should see the other guy" isn't very persuasive.
Yes it is. I'm comparing it with other very large terminals that I've used
multiple times. Obviously there's less walking in small terminals.
Just because there are other badly designed (from the pedestrian's point
of view) terminals, doesn't excuse T5 from learning from those lessons.
What lessons? As a frequent user, I think it's the best large
terminal I've ever used and sets the standard that other large
terminals should aim for. And I've used quite a few of them.
Incidentally, I'm not the only one who thinks it's good:

<http://www.worldairportawards.com/Awards/worlds_best_airport_terminal.html>

It's a pity that the newer Heathrow T2 isn't as good.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
It's a very well-designed terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a
regular user of it, which I don't think you are).
I've flown in once (very long walk to immigration) and out once (not
such a long walk to the gate). Different triangular trips.
I use it several times a year, and have arrived and departed from all three
of the buildings. I've also used all the business and first class lounges.
Maybe you are over-conditioned to these unnecessary route-marches.
Well, I know it's significantly better than any other large terminal I
use, and I've used a lot, including Singapore, Hong Kong, Beijing,
etc. I'm curious why you hate it so much, given that you've hardly any
experience of it?
Roland Perry
2017-03-25 12:51:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Maybe you are over-conditioned to these unnecessary route-marches.
Well, I know it's significantly better than any other large terminal I
use, and I've used a lot, including Singapore, Hong Kong, Beijing,
etc. I'm curious why you hate it so much, given that you've hardly any
experience of it?
The excessive walk the first time I landed there.

When I've met people off flights, it's a shame the exit from customs is
the other end of the building to the train stations.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-25 14:55:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Maybe you are over-conditioned to these unnecessary route-marches.
Well, I know it's significantly better than any other large terminal I
use, and I've used a lot, including Singapore, Hong Kong, Beijing,
etc. I'm curious why you hate it so much, given that you've hardly any
experience of it?
The excessive walk the first time I landed there.
When I've met people off flights, it's a shame the exit from customs is
the other end of the building to the train stations.
It would indeed be so if it were true, but it's not. Are you sure
you've even been to T5? Your memories of it are so far divorced from
reality that I wonder if you only imagine having been there. Or
perhaps you had a bad lag on your visit to it, long ago, and had
trouble walking?

Here's the reality:

From international arrivals, it's a short walk to the HEx exit (less
than one sixth of the terminal length), and a slightly longer one to
the Tube (less than a quarter of the terminal length). It's the other
way round from domestic arrivals. The station for the future western
rail link will be directly opposite the customs exit.

Incidentally, what makes the walk longer than it needs to be is the
arrivals 'duty free' (sic) shop that you have to walk through. Without
that, the northern customs exit would be almost directly opposite to
the HEx exit. Of course, apart from the shop's revenue aspect, they
may not have wanted the crowd of meeters and greeters to be clustered
directly in front of, and possibly blocking, the HEx exit.

In all cases, the distances to the railway stations are less than any
of the other Heathrow or Gatwick terminals. By far the worst in LHR is
the T3 link to the central Tube station.

See the last page of
<http://www.heathrow.com/file_source/Heathrow/Static/PDF/Maps/Heathrow_T5_Map.pdf>
Roland Perry
2017-03-25 15:59:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
From international arrivals,
When I was there people emerged from the customs, and were faced with a
left-right barrier, with greeters crowding along it. Most people then
carried on in the direction the majority exited from #11 and ended up
being met near #13.

So you have to add #11 to #13, and back again.
Post by Recliner
it's a short walk to the HEx exit (less than one sixth of the terminal
length), and a slightly longer one to the Tube (less than a quarter of
the terminal length).
Both are in the northern quartile of the terminal.
Post by Recliner
See the last page of
<http://www.heathrow.com/file_source/Heathrow/Static/PDF/Maps/Heathrow_T5_Map.pdf>
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-25 16:33:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
From international arrivals,
When I was there people emerged from the customs, and were faced with a
left-right barrier, with greeters crowding along it. Most people then
carried on in the direction the majority exited from #11 and ended up
being met near #13.
So you have to add #11 to #13, and back again.
No, that's a mistake travellers don't make twice. If you're not being met,
there's no need to walk along the line of meeters and greeters in the wrong
direction.

Regular (or even second-time) users take the best exit (the northern
customs exit from the baggage hall, and take the first right on exit).
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
it's a short walk to the HEx exit (less than one sixth of the terminal
length), and a slightly longer one to the Tube (less than a quarter of
the terminal length).
Both are in the northern quartile of the terminal.
No, only the Tube entrance is in the northern quartile. The HEx entrance is
about a third of the way along, while the best customs exit is just north
of the centre. That makes the distance between the customs exit and the HEx
entrance very short, though still longer than it needs to be. It'll be even
easier to access the new western rail link station when/if it opens in a
few years time.

One other thing I should have mentioned: HAL stations its HEx ticket touts
in the 'duty-free' shop, going it another reason not to let you bypass the
shop.
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
See the last page of
<http://www.heathrow.com/file_source/Heathrow/Static/PDF/Maps/Heathrow_T5_Map.pdf>
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 08:36:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<179252033.512151292.216966.recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-septe
mber.org>, at 16:33:49 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
From international arrivals,
When I was there people emerged from the customs, and were faced with a
left-right barrier, with greeters crowding along it. Most people then
carried on in the direction the majority exited from #11 and ended up
being met near #13.
So you have to add #11 to #13, and back again.
No, that's a mistake travellers don't make twice. If you're not being met,
there's no need to walk along the line of meeters and greeters in the wrong
direction.
No "need", but the design is such that people get swept along in that
direction with the others. The immediate u-turn is completely
counter-intuitive.
Post by Recliner
Regular (or even second-time) users take the best exit (the northern
customs exit from the baggage hall, and take the first right on exit).
There aren't many second-time users with that good a memory. Especially
if they have three big terminals at Heathrow and two at Gatwick to cope
with - and that's just one country!
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-26 08:56:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
In message
mber.org>, at 16:33:49 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
From international arrivals,
When I was there people emerged from the customs, and were faced with a
left-right barrier, with greeters crowding along it. Most people then
carried on in the direction the majority exited from #11 and ended up
being met near #13.
So you have to add #11 to #13, and back again.
No, that's a mistake travellers don't make twice. If you're not being met,
there's no need to walk along the line of meeters and greeters in the wrong
direction.
No "need", but the design is such that people get swept along in that
direction with the others. The immediate u-turn is completely
counter-intuitive.
Post by Recliner
Regular (or even second-time) users take the best exit (the northern
customs exit from the baggage hall, and take the first right on exit).
There aren't many second-time users with that good a memory. Especially
if they have three big terminals at Heathrow and two at Gatwick to cope
with - and that's just one country!
Four at Heathrow. Even the smaller T4 is large by the standards of other
airports. But these tips are easier than taking the best routes through
Kings Cross or Green Park LU stations, which you don't have any trouble
finding and remembering.

One problem with Gatwick North is that all the building work means that it
changes between visits, so my shortcut from each visit may no longer be
valid by the next visit.
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 09:37:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<821171586.512211125.010395.recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-septe
mber.org>, at 08:56:48 on Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
mber.org>, at 16:33:49 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
From international arrivals,
When I was there people emerged from the customs, and were faced with a
left-right barrier, with greeters crowding along it. Most people then
carried on in the direction the majority exited from #11 and ended up
being met near #13.
So you have to add #11 to #13, and back again.
No, that's a mistake travellers don't make twice. If you're not being met,
there's no need to walk along the line of meeters and greeters in the wrong
direction.
No "need", but the design is such that people get swept along in that
direction with the others. The immediate u-turn is completely
counter-intuitive.
Post by Recliner
Regular (or even second-time) users take the best exit (the northern
customs exit from the baggage hall, and take the first right on exit).
There aren't many second-time users with that good a memory. Especially
if they have three big terminals at Heathrow and two at Gatwick to cope
with - and that's just one country!
Four at Heathrow.
I was only counting the long haul ones.
Post by Recliner
Even the smaller T4 is large by the standards of other
airports. But these tips are easier than taking the best routes through
Kings Cross or Green Park LU stations, which you don't have any trouble
finding and remembering.
Not only do I have a brain that happens to work in that way (in effect I
have a "photographic memory" for walking/driving routes), I've been
using the tube for 50yrs. In the case of Kings Cross, I followed the
design and building with a fine tooth comb. Here's my much-discussed
guess at the final configuration, long before they started building:

Loading Image...
Post by Recliner
One problem with Gatwick North is that all the building work means that it
changes between visits, so my shortcut from each visit may no longer be
valid by the next visit.
Same effect in whatever LHR T123 is called this week.
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-26 09:57:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
In message
mber.org>, at 08:56:48 on Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
mber.org>, at 16:33:49 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
From international arrivals,
When I was there people emerged from the customs, and were faced with a
left-right barrier, with greeters crowding along it. Most people then
carried on in the direction the majority exited from #11 and ended up
being met near #13.
So you have to add #11 to #13, and back again.
No, that's a mistake travellers don't make twice. If you're not being met,
there's no need to walk along the line of meeters and greeters in the wrong
direction.
No "need", but the design is such that people get swept along in that
direction with the others. The immediate u-turn is completely
counter-intuitive.
Post by Recliner
Regular (or even second-time) users take the best exit (the northern
customs exit from the baggage hall, and take the first right on exit).
There aren't many second-time users with that good a memory. Especially
if they have three big terminals at Heathrow and two at Gatwick to cope
with - and that's just one country!
Four at Heathrow.
I was only counting the long haul ones.
Yes, Heathrow has four long-haul terminals, all of which get A380 services.
Which one did you think wasn't long haul?
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Recliner
Even the smaller T4 is large by the standards of other
airports. But these tips are easier than taking the best routes through
Kings Cross or Green Park LU stations, which you don't have any trouble
finding and remembering.
Not only do I have a brain that happens to work in that way (in effect I
have a "photographic memory" for walking/driving routes), I've been
using the tube for 50yrs. In the case of Kings Cross, I followed the
design and building with a fine tooth comb. Here's my much-discussed
http://www.perry.co.uk/images/kx-composite.jpg
Post by Recliner
One problem with Gatwick North is that all the building work means that it
changes between visits, so my shortcut from each visit may no longer be
valid by the next visit.
Same effect in whatever LHR T123 is called this week.
The current building work there doesn't have much effect on passengers:
they're continuing to demolish what's left of T1. In time, T2 will be
extended into that area, but passengers won't see the changes for many
years.
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 10:51:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message
<232907096.512214887.805150.recliner.ng-***@news.eternal-septe
mber.org>, at 09:57:09 on Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Yes, Heathrow has four long-haul terminals, all of which get A380 services.
Which one did you think wasn't long haul?
T1, but I see you saying it's no longer in use. (And hence any memory of
the quickest exit route is moot).
--
Roland Perry
Recliner
2017-03-26 13:14:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
In message
mber.org>, at 09:57:09 on Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Yes, Heathrow has four long-haul terminals, all of which get A380 services.
Which one did you think wasn't long haul?
T1, but I see you saying it's no longer in use. (And hence any memory of
the quickest exit route is moot).
LHR T1 closed almost two years ago, and in its final few months had
few remaining flights. But before then, there were actually five
terminals handling long-haul flights for a period, as T1 also handled
some long-haul flights. It was probably decades ago that T1 was
short-haul only, certainly before T4 opened.

It must therefore be quite a few years since LHR only had three
terminals with long-haul flights. Perhaps it was before T5 opened,
when T2 was still used mainly for short-haul European flights (it was
originally called the Europa Building); however, I'm not sure if it
didn't get a few long-hauls as well.
r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2017-03-26 15:27:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
mber.org>, at 09:57:09 on Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Yes, Heathrow has four long-haul terminals, all of which get A380
services. Which one did you think wasn't long haul?
T1, but I see you saying it's no longer in use. (And hence any memory of
the quickest exit route is moot).
LHR T1 closed almost two years ago, and in its final few months had
few remaining flights. But before then, there were actually five
terminals handling long-haul flights for a period, as T1 also handled
some long-haul flights. It was probably decades ago that T1 was
short-haul only, certainly before T4 opened.
Surely it was the old T2 (built as the BEA Terminal) which was short-haul
only?
Post by Recliner
It must therefore be quite a few years since LHR only had three
terminals with long-haul flights. Perhaps it was before T5 opened,
when T2 was still used mainly for short-haul European flights (it was
originally called the Europa Building); however, I'm not sure if it
didn't get a few long-hauls as well.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Recliner
2017-03-26 15:45:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
mber.org>, at 09:57:09 on Sun, 26 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Yes, Heathrow has four long-haul terminals, all of which get A380
services. Which one did you think wasn't long haul?
T1, but I see you saying it's no longer in use. (And hence any memory of
the quickest exit route is moot).
LHR T1 closed almost two years ago, and in its final few months had
few remaining flights. But before then, there were actually five
terminals handling long-haul flights for a period, as T1 also handled
some long-haul flights. It was probably decades ago that T1 was
short-haul only, certainly before T4 opened.
Surely it was the old T2 (built as the BEA Terminal) which was short-haul
only?
Post by Recliner
It must therefore be quite a few years since LHR only had three
terminals with long-haul flights. Perhaps it was before T5 opened,
when T2 was still used mainly for short-haul European flights (it was
originally called the Europa Building); however, I'm not sure if it
didn't get a few long-hauls as well.
BA left T2 many years ago, which was then used by other European airlines,
and for a long time split its flights between T1 and T3, with short haul in
T1. When T4 opened, BA split its flights across all three terminals, with
only T2 not seeing BA flights.
r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2017-03-26 12:25:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Not only do I have a brain that happens to work in that way (in
effect I have a "photographic memory" for walking/driving routes),
I've been using the tube for 50yrs. In the case of Kings Cross, I
followed the design and building with a fine tooth comb. Here's my
much-discussed guess at the final configuration, long before they
http://www.perry.co.uk/images/kx-composite.jpg
Yet from the stairs beyond the end of platform 8, labelled Kings Cross
Mainline (ECML) in your diagram, the signs at the bottom of the stairs
direct passengers to turn right for the Victoria Line while turning left is
a much shorter walking route. This is as daft as imagining that one-way
streets reduce traffic.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Recliner
2017-03-26 13:19:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Not only do I have a brain that happens to work in that way (in
effect I have a "photographic memory" for walking/driving routes),
I've been using the tube for 50yrs. In the case of Kings Cross, I
followed the design and building with a fine tooth comb. Here's my
much-discussed guess at the final configuration, long before they
http://www.perry.co.uk/images/kx-composite.jpg
Yet from the stairs beyond the end of platform 8, labelled Kings Cross
Mainline (ECML) in your diagram, the signs at the bottom of the stairs
direct passengers to turn right for the Victoria Line while turning left is
a much shorter walking route. This is as daft as imagining that one-way
streets reduce traffic.
Roland has often pointed out that there are sometimes better ways
through the Kings Cross underground maze than the signposted routes,
which seem designed to spread people out, in order to reduce
over-crowding, rather than to give them the shortest route. They also,
in some cases, lead to step-free routes.
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 13:24:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Not only do I have a brain that happens to work in that way (in
effect I have a "photographic memory" for walking/driving routes),
I've been using the tube for 50yrs. In the case of Kings Cross, I
followed the design and building with a fine tooth comb. Here's my
much-discussed guess at the final configuration, long before they
http://www.perry.co.uk/images/kx-composite.jpg
Yet from the stairs beyond the end of platform 8, labelled Kings Cross
Mainline (ECML) in your diagram, the signs at the bottom of the stairs
direct passengers to turn right for the Victoria Line while turning left is
a much shorter walking route. This is as daft as imagining that one-way
streets reduce traffic.
Roland has often pointed out that there are sometimes better ways
through the Kings Cross underground maze than the signposted routes,
which seem designed to spread people out, in order to reduce
over-crowding,
Exactly.
Post by Recliner
rather than to give them the shortest route. They also,
in some cases, lead to step-free routes.
Picc and Vic.

Northern and Circle step-free are at the southern end of the comples.
--
Roland Perry
r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2017-03-26 15:27:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Not only do I have a brain that happens to work in that way (in
effect I have a "photographic memory" for walking/driving routes),
I've been using the tube for 50yrs. In the case of Kings Cross, I
followed the design and building with a fine tooth comb. Here's my
much-discussed guess at the final configuration, long before they
http://www.perry.co.uk/images/kx-composite.jpg
Yet from the stairs beyond the end of platform 8, labelled Kings Cross
Mainline (ECML) in your diagram, the signs at the bottom of the stairs
direct passengers to turn right for the Victoria Line while turning left
is a much shorter walking route. This is as daft as imagining that
one-way streets reduce traffic.
Roland has often pointed out that there are sometimes better ways
through the Kings Cross underground maze than the signposted routes,
which seem designed to spread people out, in order to reduce
over-crowding, rather than to give them the shortest route. They also,
in some cases, lead to step-free routes.
Hence my reference to the fallacy that (longer) one-way streets reduce
traffic. Sending people on longer routes creates congestion, especially when
so spectacularly longer than the direct route. Not so long ago they
recognised this and reversed the direction arrow I was referring to. The
change was then undone.

It undermines faith in direction signing when people discover they are being
sent on long detours.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 18:11:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Not only do I have a brain that happens to work in that way (in
effect I have a "photographic memory" for walking/driving routes),
I've been using the tube for 50yrs. In the case of Kings Cross, I
followed the design and building with a fine tooth comb. Here's my
much-discussed guess at the final configuration, long before they
http://www.perry.co.uk/images/kx-composite.jpg
Yet from the stairs beyond the end of platform 8, labelled Kings Cross
Mainline (ECML) in your diagram, the signs at the bottom of the stairs
direct passengers to turn right for the Victoria Line while turning left
is a much shorter walking route. This is as daft as imagining that
one-way streets reduce traffic.
Roland has often pointed out that there are sometimes better ways
through the Kings Cross underground maze than the signposted routes,
which seem designed to spread people out, in order to reduce
over-crowding, rather than to give them the shortest route. They also,
in some cases, lead to step-free routes.
Hence my reference to the fallacy that (longer) one-way streets reduce
traffic. Sending people on longer routes creates congestion, especially when
so spectacularly longer than the direct route.
It's not the equivalent of one-way streets - they've built a three lane
each way inner ring road in addition to the existing High Street.
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Not so long ago they recognised this and reversed the direction arrow I
was referring to. The change was then undone.
Perhaps the congestion was worse?
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
It undermines faith in direction signing when people discover they are being
sent on long detours.
If they are non-regulars they won't even know. Regulars who care will
take the shorter one.
--
Roland Perry
r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2017-03-26 23:33:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Not only do I have a brain that happens to work in that way (in
effect I have a "photographic memory" for walking/driving routes),
I've been using the tube for 50yrs. In the case of Kings Cross, I
followed the design and building with a fine tooth comb. Here's my
much-discussed guess at the final configuration, long before they
http://www.perry.co.uk/images/kx-composite.jpg
Yet from the stairs beyond the end of platform 8, labelled Kings Cross
Mainline (ECML) in your diagram, the signs at the bottom of the stairs
direct passengers to turn right for the Victoria Line while turning
left is a much shorter walking route. This is as daft as imagining
that one-way streets reduce traffic.
Roland has often pointed out that there are sometimes better ways
through the Kings Cross underground maze than the signposted routes,
which seem designed to spread people out, in order to reduce
over-crowding, rather than to give them the shortest route. They also,
in some cases, lead to step-free routes.
Hence my reference to the fallacy that (longer) one-way streets reduce
traffic. Sending people on longer routes creates congestion, especially
when so spectacularly longer than the direct route.
It's not the equivalent of one-way streets - they've built a three
lane each way inner ring road in addition to the existing High Street.
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Not so long ago they recognised this and reversed the direction arrow I
was referring to. The change was then undone.
Perhaps the congestion was worse?
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
It undermines faith in direction signing when people discover they are
being sent on long detours.
If they are non-regulars they won't even know. Regulars who care will
take the shorter one.
Some heroic assumptions there.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Roland Perry
2017-03-27 07:14:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
It undermines faith in direction signing when people discover they are
being sent on long detours.
If they are non-regulars they won't even know. Regulars who care will
take the shorter one.
Some heroic assumptions there.
What are your alternative assumptions?
--
Roland Perry
r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2017-03-27 08:42:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
It undermines faith in direction signing when people discover they
are being sent on long detours.
If they are non-regulars they won't even know. Regulars who care will
take the shorter one.
Some heroic assumptions there.
What are your alternative assumptions?
Be more open with people.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Roland Perry
2017-03-27 09:34:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
It undermines faith in direction signing when people discover they
are being sent on long detours.
If they are non-regulars they won't even know. Regulars who care will
take the shorter one.
Some heroic assumptions there.
What are your alternative assumptions?
Be more open with people.
That's not an assumption, it's a course of action. And one that would
increase congestion. I can remember when the lower concourse of the
Victoria Line (and it's not small) was full in the evening rush hour of
people queuing for the escalator up to the original ticket hall.

You want to go back to that?
--
Roland Perry
r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2017-03-27 10:11:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
It undermines faith in direction signing when people discover they
are being sent on long detours.
If they are non-regulars they won't even know. Regulars who care
will take the shorter one.
Some heroic assumptions there.
What are your alternative assumptions?
Be more open with people.
That's not an assumption, it's a course of action. And one that would
increase congestion. I can remember when the lower concourse of the
Victoria Line (and it's not small) was full in the evening rush hour
of people queuing for the escalator up to the original ticket hall.
You want to go back to that?
They can choose for themselves instead of being treated like children.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Roland Perry
2017-03-27 10:29:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
It undermines faith in direction signing when people discover they
are being sent on long detours.
If they are non-regulars they won't even know. Regulars who care
will take the shorter one.
Some heroic assumptions there.
What are your alternative assumptions?
Be more open with people.
That's not an assumption, it's a course of action. And one that would
increase congestion. I can remember when the lower concourse of the
Victoria Line (and it's not small) was full in the evening rush hour
of people queuing for the escalator up to the original ticket hall.
You want to go back to that?
They can choose for themselves instead of being treated like children.
The "people who know" will than have to take the long route, because the
"children" as you put it will be clogging up the sohrt route.
--
Roland Perry
r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
2017-03-27 18:35:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
It undermines faith in direction signing when people discover
they are being sent on long detours.
If they are non-regulars they won't even know. Regulars who care
will take the shorter one.
Some heroic assumptions there.
What are your alternative assumptions?
Be more open with people.
That's not an assumption, it's a course of action. And one that would
increase congestion. I can remember when the lower concourse of the
Victoria Line (and it's not small) was full in the evening rush hour
of people queuing for the escalator up to the original ticket hall.
You want to go back to that?
They can choose for themselves instead of being treated like children.
The "people who know" will than have to take the long route, because
the "children" as you put it will be clogging up the sohrt route.
Maybe. Who knows?
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Roland Perry
2017-03-27 21:08:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
That's not an assumption, it's a course of action. And one that would
increase congestion. I can remember when the lower concourse of the
Victoria Line (and it's not small) was full in the evening rush hour
of people queuing for the escalator up to the original ticket hall.
You want to go back to that?
They can choose for themselves instead of being treated like children.
The "people who know" will than have to take the long route, because
the "children" as you put it will be clogging up the sohrt route.
Maybe. Who knows?
The people doing the people flow calculations. One of the other maps in
the series I used to make my composite was a congestion heatmap.
--
Roland Perry
Roland Perry
2017-03-26 13:22:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Not only do I have a brain that happens to work in that way (in
effect I have a "photographic memory" for walking/driving routes),
I've been using the tube for 50yrs. In the case of Kings Cross, I
followed the design and building with a fine tooth comb. Here's my
much-discussed guess at the final configuration, long before they
http://www.perry.co.uk/images/kx-composite.jpg
Yet from the stairs beyond the end of platform 8, labelled Kings Cross
Mainline (ECML) in your diagram, the signs at the bottom of the stairs
direct passengers to turn right for the Victoria Line while turning left is
a much shorter walking route. This is as daft as imagining that one-way
streets reduce traffic.
That's because the pairs of escalators to the deep tube from the classic
hall can't cope with the full flow (or anything like it) so the signage
tries to convince sufficient people to go via the new high-capacity
route. In extremes they set up a one-way system where it's only "up" to
the classic hall (but sadly they still mix some-of-the-up with the all-
of-the-down in those long tunnels, which doesn't really fit).
--
Roland Perry
Basil Jet
2017-03-27 02:30:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by r***@cix.compulink.co.uk
Post by Roland Perry
Not only do I have a brain that happens to work in that way (in
effect I have a "photographic memory" for walking/driving routes),
I've been using the tube for 50yrs. In the case of Kings Cross, I
followed the design and building with a fine tooth comb. Here's my
much-discussed guess at the final configuration, long before they
http://www.perry.co.uk/images/kx-composite.jpg
Yet from the stairs beyond the end of platform 8, labelled Kings Cross
Mainline (ECML) in your diagram, the signs at the bottom of the stairs
direct passengers to turn right for the Victoria Line while turning left is
a much shorter walking route. This is as daft as imagining that one-way
streets reduce traffic.
If every road ran North/East and no roads ran South/West, that would
reduce traffic!

Seriously, some one way systems definitely reduce traffic on the roads
concerned, especially if there are banned turns as well. For instance,
Fairchild Street in Shoreditch is westbound only with no right turn in,
so I have never seen a vehicle using it.
Neil Williams
2017-03-26 09:11:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roland Perry
No "need", but the design is such that people get swept along in that
direction with the others. The immediate u-turn is completely
counter-intuitive.
It's amazing how much of an effect that has. At some Euston platforms
the best chance of a seat is at the rear of the train as to get back to
it you have to double back from the barrier. Only a coach length, but
it's enough to "hide" it.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.
Clank
2017-03-27 16:49:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
ember.org>, at 09:31:13 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4.
"You should see the other guy" isn't very persuasive.
Yes it is. I'm comparing it with other very large terminals that I've used
multiple times. Obviously there's less walking in small terminals.
Guangzhou is an excellent place to change flights if you think you may have
been neglecting your marathon training.

Vaguely on topic, the photos you showed looked very similar to the transit
at Munich between the two halves of the Lufthansa terminal. Which also has
very long escalators (which the smart passenger ignores - three little used
lift is much quicker.)
Recliner
2017-03-27 20:33:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clank
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
In message
ember.org>, at 09:31:13 on Sat, 25 Mar 2017, Recliner
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4.
"You should see the other guy" isn't very persuasive.
Yes it is. I'm comparing it with other very large terminals that I've used
multiple times. Obviously there's less walking in small terminals.
Guangzhou is an excellent place to change flights if you think you may have
been neglecting your marathon training.
Vaguely on topic, the photos you showed looked very similar to the transit
at Munich between the two halves of the Lufthansa terminal. Which also has
very long escalators (which the smart passenger ignores - three little used
lift is much quicker.)
Yes, I'd think it's all a pretty generic design -- lots of glass and
stainless steel, and the trains themselves are standard Bombardier design.


Heathrow T5 is an unusually high terminal, so the departure escalators are
particularly long. It's striking that regular travellers, particularly
flight crew, head straight for the lifts, as they're quicker, but if you
have the time, the escalators provide a more dramatic descent into the
earth. The arrivals escalators are much less dramatic.
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2017-03-25 17:16:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4. It's a very well-designed
terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a regular user of it, which I
don't think you are).
As for the length of the departures escalator, do you really think this
doesn't look very long?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/32808675503/in/album-72157679819076761/lightbox/
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2162/2307578958_56a8379188.jpg
<https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/w/images/b/b2/xHeathrow_terminal_5_section.jpg.pagespeed.ic.0TNbVhu1wB.jpg>
http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/london/heathrow_t5_rshp2008_concept4a.jpg
The Wikipedia page claims, without attribution, that "the escalators are
also the longest in the United Kingdom, longer than those at Angel tube
station on the London Underground, which had held the title since 1992".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_tube_station#Escalators
Thus, the longest ones in Western Europe?

They've still got nothing compared with the Pyongyang Metro, which
reportedly has the world's longest escalator.
Recliner
2017-03-25 17:31:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4. It's a very well-designed
terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a regular user of it, which I
don't think you are).
As for the length of the departures escalator, do you really think this
doesn't look very long?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/32808675503/in/album-72157679819076761/lightbox/
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2162/2307578958_56a8379188.jpg
<https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/w/images/b/b2/xHeathrow_terminal_5_section.jpg.pagespeed.ic.0TNbVhu1wB.jpg>
http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/london/heathrow_t5_rshp2008_concept4a.jpg
The Wikipedia page claims, without attribution, that "the escalators are
also the longest in the United Kingdom, longer than those at Angel tube
station on the London Underground, which had held the title since 1992".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_tube_station#Escalators
Thus, the longest ones in Western Europe?
They've still got nothing compared with the Pyongyang Metro, which
reportedly has the world's longest escalator.
This one?
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717487216/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>

<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717486808/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>

Being so long, no-one attempts to walk up or even down it.
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2017-03-25 18:20:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4. It's a very well-designed
terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a regular user of it, which I
don't think you are).
As for the length of the departures escalator, do you really think this
doesn't look very long?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/32808675503/in/album-72157679819076761/lightbox/
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2162/2307578958_56a8379188.jpg
<https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/w/images/b/b2/xHeathrow_terminal_5_section.jpg.pagespeed.ic.0TNbVhu1wB.jpg>
http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/london/heathrow_t5_rshp2008_concept4a.jpg
The Wikipedia page claims, without attribution, that "the escalators are
also the longest in the United Kingdom, longer than those at Angel tube
station on the London Underground, which had held the title since 1992".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_tube_station#Escalators
Thus, the longest ones in Western Europe?
They've still got nothing compared with the Pyongyang Metro, which
reportedly has the world's longest escalator.
This one?
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717487216/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717486808/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
Being so long, no-one attempts to walk up or even down it.
Where is that, Puhung?

There is one station on that network, though I don't think that it's
Puhung, which has what is the world's longest escalator.

On a side note, I would love to find one of the old metro tokens from
the Pyongyang Metro.
Recliner
2017-03-25 21:26:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4. It's a very well-designed
terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a regular user of it, which I
don't think you are).
As for the length of the departures escalator, do you really think this
doesn't look very long?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/32808675503/in/album-72157679819076761/lightbox/
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2162/2307578958_56a8379188.jpg
<https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/w/images/b/b2/xHeathrow_terminal_5_section.jpg.pagespeed.ic.0TNbVhu1wB.jpg>
http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/london/heathrow_t5_rshp2008_concept4a.jpg
The Wikipedia page claims, without attribution, that "the escalators are
also the longest in the United Kingdom, longer than those at Angel tube
station on the London Underground, which had held the title since 1992".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_tube_station#Escalators
Thus, the longest ones in Western Europe?
They've still got nothing compared with the Pyongyang Metro, which
reportedly has the world's longest escalator.
This one?
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717487216/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717486808/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
Being so long, no-one attempts to walk up or even down it.
Where is that, Puhung?
Yes, Puhŭng.
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
There is one station on that network, though I don't think that it's
Puhung, which has what is the world's longest escalator.
I don't know if it's longer, but here's one I took at Kaeson station:
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717502198/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>

Pyongyang is fairly flat, so I wouldn't have thought there'd be much
difference in escalator lengths. But it does raise a question: who made
them? I'm guessing it must be a Chinese company. I doubt that North Korea
was capable of making the world's longest escalators back in 1970.
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
On a side note, I would love to find one of the old metro tokens from
the Pyongyang Metro.
Sorry, can't help there.
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2017-03-26 00:41:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4. It's a very well-designed
terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a regular user of it, which I
don't think you are).
As for the length of the departures escalator, do you really think this
doesn't look very long?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/32808675503/in/album-72157679819076761/lightbox/
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2162/2307578958_56a8379188.jpg
<https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/w/images/b/b2/xHeathrow_terminal_5_section.jpg.pagespeed.ic.0TNbVhu1wB.jpg>
http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/london/heathrow_t5_rshp2008_concept4a.jpg
The Wikipedia page claims, without attribution, that "the escalators are
also the longest in the United Kingdom, longer than those at Angel tube
station on the London Underground, which had held the title since 1992".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_tube_station#Escalators
Thus, the longest ones in Western Europe?
They've still got nothing compared with the Pyongyang Metro, which
reportedly has the world's longest escalator.
This one?
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717487216/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717486808/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
Being so long, no-one attempts to walk up or even down it.
Where is that, Puhung?
Yes, Puhŭng.
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
There is one station on that network, though I don't think that it's
Puhung, which has what is the world's longest escalator.
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717502198/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
I liked the other pictures as well.
Post by Recliner
Pyongyang is fairly flat, so I wouldn't have thought there'd be much
difference in escalator lengths.
Is there much variation in depths?
Post by Recliner
But it does raise a question: who made
them? I'm guessing it must be a Chinese company. I doubt that North Korea
was capable of making the world's longest escalators back in 1970.
I thought that they initially received technical assistance from the
Soviet Union, though I know that the rolling stock was Chinese.
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
On a side note, I would love to find one of the old metro tokens from
the Pyongyang Metro.
Sorry, can't help there.
I think that they are hard to find.
Recliner
2017-03-26 00:54:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4. It's a very well-designed
terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a regular user of it, which I
don't think you are).
As for the length of the departures escalator, do you really think this
doesn't look very long?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/32808675503/in/album-72157679819076761/lightbox/
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2162/2307578958_56a8379188.jpg
<https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/w/images/b/b2/xHeathrow_terminal_5_section.jpg.pagespeed.ic.0TNbVhu1wB.jpg>
http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/london/heathrow_t5_rshp2008_concept4a.jpg
The Wikipedia page claims, without attribution, that "the escalators are
also the longest in the United Kingdom, longer than those at Angel tube
station on the London Underground, which had held the title since 1992".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_tube_station#Escalators
Thus, the longest ones in Western Europe?
They've still got nothing compared with the Pyongyang Metro, which
reportedly has the world's longest escalator.
This one?
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717487216/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717486808/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
Being so long, no-one attempts to walk up or even down it.
Where is that, Puhung?
Yes, Puhŭng.
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
There is one station on that network, though I don't think that it's
Puhung, which has what is the world's longest escalator.
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717502198/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
I liked the other pictures as well.
Post by Recliner
Pyongyang is fairly flat, so I wouldn't have thought there'd be much
difference in escalator lengths.
Is there much variation in depths?
I don't know, but I don't know why there would be. The metro is too deep to
have to be concerned by buildings and roads above. Any rivers are also
high above it.
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
But it does raise a question: who made
them? I'm guessing it must be a Chinese company. I doubt that North Korea
was capable of making the world's longest escalators back in 1970.
I thought that they initially received technical assistance from the
Soviet Union, though I know that the rolling stock was Chinese.
Yes, you're right, those long escalators may well be Russian. The Russians
do have significant experience of very deep metro lines.
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
On a side note, I would love to find one of the old metro tokens from
the Pyongyang Metro.
Sorry, can't help there.
I think that they are hard to find.
h***@yahoo.co.uk
2017-03-26 18:34:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
Post by Roland Perry
Post by Richard J.
I recall that when the transit first opened, Heathrow Airport claimed
that the "very long" escalators from the main termainal were the
longest in London, longer than the longest LU escalators at Angel.
The escalators in recliner's pictures don't look that long. But I'm
convinced the layout at T5, which extends the idea of making people
travel the maximum distance they'll tolerate to and from gates, is to
allow them to be more leisurely about their baggage handling.
There's less walking in T5 than in most other large terminals, such as LHR
T2, either Gatwick terminal or Madrid Barajas T4. It's a very well-designed
terminal that's a pleasure to use (and I'm a regular user of it, which I
don't think you are).
As for the length of the departures escalator, do you really think this
doesn't look very long?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/32808675503/in/album-72157679819076761/lightbox/
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2162/2307578958_56a8379188.jpg
<https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/w/images/b/b2/xHeathrow_terminal_5_section.jpg.pagespeed.ic.0TNbVhu1wB.jpg>
http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/london/heathrow_t5_rshp2008_concept4a.jpg
The Wikipedia page claims, without attribution, that "the escalators are
also the longest in the United Kingdom, longer than those at Angel tube
station on the London Underground, which had held the title since 1992".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angel_tube_station#Escalators
Thus, the longest ones in Western Europe?
They've still got nothing compared with the Pyongyang Metro, which
reportedly has the world's longest escalator.
This one?
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717487216/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717486808/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
Being so long, no-one attempts to walk up or even down it.
Where is that, Puhung?
Yes, Puhŭng.
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
There is one station on that network, though I don't think that it's
Puhung, which has what is the world's longest escalator.
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/8717502198/in/album-72157633424928749/lightbox/>
I liked the other pictures as well.
Post by Recliner
Pyongyang is fairly flat, so I wouldn't have thought there'd be much
difference in escalator lengths.
Is there much variation in depths?
I don't know, but I don't know why there would be. The metro is too deep to
have to be concerned by buildings and roads above. Any rivers are also
high above it.
Post by h***@yahoo.co.uk
Post by Recliner
But it does raise a question: who made
them? I'm guessing it must be a Chinese company. I doubt that North Korea
was capable of making the world's longest escalators back in 1970.
I thought that they initially received technical assistance from the
Soviet Union, though I know that the rolling stock was Chinese.
Yes, you're right, those long escalators may well be Russian. The Russians
do have significant experience of very deep metro lines.
I think so. Chinese metro systems are nowhere near as deep as anything
that one would see in North Korea or the former Soviet Union, AIUI.

One other thing that I have also heard about the escalators in Pyongyang
is that they use ***a lot*** of energy, and are not at all economical.
Loading...