I pointed out that the park & rides are exactly the same place that tourists who travel by car (and some by coach) arrive in the city. Simply hop on the P&R buses to complete the journey.
You certainly didn't specify rail-borne tourists.
I know what I said, thanks. Why should I have had to specify rail-borne tourists? This is a thread about a railway project on a forum called RailUK Forums, so as far as I'm concerned it was stark staring obvious I was talking about rail-borne tourists, who if they catch a train to 'Oxford' in the early days of the Chiltern service, may not expect to wind up at a car park.
And if I do have to be specific for you, then I will specify rail-borne tourists travelling from London to Oxford, many of them doing so on day trips, who won't have a car to begin with. Who might appreciate being told that it is actually possible to reach the centre of Oxford on a train without needing to crawl down Banbury Road on a bus to complete their journey.
Which is a rather different matter from people in cars being encouraged to use a park-and-ride, an entirely sensible thing to do in a city with Oxford's chronic congestion. The rail-borne tourists haven't got a car with them in the first place, have they?
And no shortage of trains either; once EWR is up and running there'll be four trains an hour to Oxford General (not that that's particularly usefully sited for tourists either).
Do try to read the thread before posting. The point I was making was about the period when Chiltern's Oxford service will only get as far as the parkway station, not to the city centre, and whether Chiltern would have the honesty to say so during this period, rather than gloss it over - but if I am to believe several other posters, glossing it over is just fine, as people can get on a bus, even if there's a train service straight to the place they want to go, running on another route.
There is nothing wrong with the name. There will be a large increase in people asking for clarification as to which station they need to see the sights in Oxford
So are you saying that it will be confusing but that's okay? I'd suggest that there is something wrong with the name if people need clarification.
If it was called Oxford North and Kidlington Parkway, then there's a fair chance that putting the clues in the name together, people could work out quite easily that it was not in the city centre from the word go. All that remains now is for Chiltern to revive 'the new station for Oxford' slogan they used in an advertising campaign a while ago, though on that occasion it was Haddenham & Thame Parkway (in buckinghamshire...).
And why Birmingham International still does not have airport in its name baffles me - an instant end to confusion over its whereabouts, airports not being noted for their central locations, with the odd exception.
). When I was once looking for housing back in the 70s, I decided that the place only existed for people to commute to somewhere else. On a recent visit all I could see was a rather scrappy shopping precinct, nothing else. So perhaps Parkway is a justified naming. If a Didcotonian is put out, I do apologise, but that's how it looked to me. I expect it will be much improved when the cooling towers are demolished.
