On Sun, 21 Nov 2004, Stevie D wrote:

Yes, the railways may lose a small amount of revenue by closing
Waterloo International. But the additional cost of maintaining and
serving two international terminal stations in London would be far
higher than the revenue that will be lost from the few passengers who
will defect to air travel or other means.

I don't see it quite that way. They're opening two new intermediate
stations, after all: they clearly feel they can "afford" the cost of
running those.

Surely the key point is that the Waterloo route has no sensible access
to 25kV overhead power, let alone to the high-speed line? So they'd
be stuck with the existing third-rail infrastructure as far as Fawkham
Junction, which, in spite of past upgrades, still leaves E* trains
under-powered.

Nevertheless, if you search the web you find lots of places where it's
reported that some E* traffic to/from Waterloo will be maintained.
So if it's true that E* is going to totally abandon Waterloo, either
someone has been telling porkies in the past, or the intentions have
changed.

Some improvements in connecting services would be most welcome. But
the past record of joined-up thinking in this land does not exactly
fill me with hope.

all the best