| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Reply | |
| Posted by: | Michael Robinson | |
| Date/Time: | 20/08/25 10:30:00 |
| No Mark, I end up arguing against fantasies put forward by Francis and others. The facts are straightforward and easy to find out but that needs work, so some people obviously find it easier to invent things and justify them with a few anecdotes. Improved access at Turnham Green is dependent on the new Piccadilly line trains and upgrade of Piccadilly line signalling to permit all-day stopping. Turnham Green can then be an interchange station and have a much stronger case for improvements. Improved access at Gunnersbury is part of the project to redevelop the buildings on top of the station. That doesn't mean it is straighforward because the station is owned by Network Rail, operated by TfL and the building owned by a developer and all of them want to minimise how much they will spend. Also, step-free access doesn't address the biggest issue with Gunnersbury which is the single stairs to the platform but whether plans will address this remains to be seen. Kew Bridge is on the list of stations published by the government a couple of weeks ago with funding provided to develop plans. None of the other stations in Chiswick have high enough passenger numbers to be prioritised above these. The reason why Piccadilly lines stop early in the morning and late in the evening is because there are fewer trains then. Are you suggesting that TfL withdraw trains earlier and provide a reduced service just so trains can stop at Turnham Green? I'd suggest you do your own research into the number of politicians who have claimed they will do something about trains stopping at Turnham Green. There have been a lot and all have failed. Politicians can't do anything about the reality of running a tube system and the negative consequences stopping at Turnham Green has on the rest of the line, until new trains and signalling will allow it. |