On 19/06/2019 12:04, Recliner wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001


well I don't know about the rest,

but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no
business
at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst
they
rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable

Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption? It's
more
likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions.

they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from the way
it's described not by building a raft on top of it)

how can that not cause major disruption?


You've obviously not looked at the map,

what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see it (You
can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article included a
link)

or read this thread.

as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult

If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged
motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current
M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights.
Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new
diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly
a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete
closure while the traffic is switched to the new route).


Are you talking about the earlier plan where the existing M4 M25
junction was half-removed and replaced by a weird junction further west?
The picture in the BBC article seems to be describing not that, but a
different plan where the M25 keeps its present horizontal alignment.

--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Nine Horses - 2005 - Snow Borne Sorrow