"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Ding Bat wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 3:03:07 PM UTC+5:30, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
11:37:52 on Sun, 21 May 2017, Ding Bat
remarked:
On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 11:07:19 PM UTC+5:30, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
09:22:54 on Sun, 21 May 2017, Ding Bat
remarked:
If, hypothetically, the judge finds that Heathrow has the right to
levy
this charge, it would be possible to charge less per train by running
more trains by adding more destinations. Heathrow Connect to
Paddington
is slated to be phased out in favor of Crossrail to Paddington.
Heathrow Connect could be continued as a service to Stratford rather
than Paddington; it would become the easiest way to get from Heathrow
to a number of northern suburbs by mass transit. In addition, trains
could be run from Heathrow to busy junctions - Reading

Once a new line is built beyond Heathrow.

What new line? The same line that takes Heathrow Express to Paddington
can be
used to go to Reading. Trains would just have to turn west toward
Reading instead instead of east toward Paddington.

Across a lake and through the middle of a warehouse. What could possibly
go wrong?

It would require some construction. To the east of Heathpark Golf Course,
the railroad is in a tunnel. The tunnel would have to be forked and the
fork routed to some point before West Drayton station, so that there can
be trains from Heathrow to Reading and points beyond.

What's the point of this idea when the *much* more useful Western Rail
Link
is underway?

For comparison, there are trains from Frankfurt airport to cities other
than Frankfurt.

That's because the airport station is on the main line.

Historically not,

they had to build the mainline to serve it, for at least the first 20 years
of its existence it was at the end of a simple spur

tim