Re: Tempe - Incorrect Signage?

["Geoff Lillico" <glillic@msn.com.au>]

Whilst to replies below now clarify the situation correctly, there appears
to be a program to remove the "next station" signage from all stations. I
would guess that it is situations like the one at Tempe that makes the
current signage confusing to passengers.

Geoff Lillico


"Optus" <ds_ready@usa.net> wrote in message
cy8f6.11445$KY1.33314@news1.rivrw1.nsw.optushome.com.au">news:cy8f6.11445$KY1.33314@news1.rivrw1.nsw.optushome.com.au...
> "David Johnson" <trainman@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> 3A7C0676.623F7875@ozemail.com.au">news:3A7C0676.623F7875@ozemail.com.au...
> > Optus wrote:
> > > Now, can anybody tell me if there is a crossover that would allow a
> train to
> > > get from platform 2 to allow it to stop at Wolli Creek station?
> > No.  It is impossible to depart platform 2 at Tempe, and then stop at
> Wolli
> > Creek (Without running via Turrella).
>
> That's basically all that I needed to know. It is pointless and misleading
> to have the next station sign as Wolli Creek if platform 2 is used mainly
> used for East Hills trains and it is impossible for trains from platform 2
> to stop at Wolli Creek.
>
> > > If not then
> > > I would suggest that the "Next Station" should be signed as either
> Arncliffe
> > > or Turrella?
> > Good suggestion, but which would you use?  Turrella would probably be
more
> > useful.
>
> The obvious choice is Turrella.
>
>