Re: Why keep Clyde?

["Erk" <erk@erkV69.au.com>]

"Robert Harris" <bob@fastlink.com.au> wrote in message
3A107FDD.1781BD46@fastlink.com.au">news:3A107FDD.1781BD46@fastlink.com.au...
| Well they could use the old parcels office and lengthen the platform at
| Granvlle or they could just shut Granville down and move the whole show
| to Clyde.
| However with the new line opening who knows what will happen.
|
| rgds
| Tezza wrote:
| >
| > "Peter Degotardi"
| > > Having spent a lot of time standing on Granville station over the
| > > last few weeks (Olympic Park, chg Lidcombe, chg Granville
| > > for Windsor), it seems a bit bizarre to have 2 stations so close
| > > together (how far apart are Granville/Clyde btw? )
| > >
| > > How about boning Clyde and making Lidcombe the interchange
| > > station for the Carlingford line ? That way you have an interchange
| > > for InnerWest, Western, South, Carlingford and Olympic Park in
| > > one location.
| >
| > And which platform at Lidcombe would you block for the Carlo trains to
sit on?

I'm surprised on of the Mexicans hasn't suggested joining Clyde and
Granville up & calling it Granville.

The (current) Granville platforms would be called the west platforms, the
(current) Clyde platforms be called the east platforms and the (future but
not going to happen) platforms linking the two current stations be called
the centre platforms.

I of course say this in jest. As if Clyde is going to be closed (when was
the last station in the Sydney metro area except for Royal National Park)
closed and removed? If anything Clyde would become unattended or a morning
shift station only if not used as an interchang
--
Eric

URL: http://www.erk.au.com
Email: erkV69@erk.au.com (remove the V69)

Talk to the hand!