J. Chisholm wrote:
Paul Scott wrote:
"Matthew Geier" wrote in message
...
So on 'environmental grounds' they want the more capable and
efficient over head system replaced by an inadequate and possibly
dangerous ground level system.


I think you are missing the factt that it really is only a very short
extension to an existing third rail system if they ran third rail
into the T5 basement - and there can't really be much of a
'technical issue' given the neighbouring LU tracks for the
Piccadilly. Staying with third rail would mean the TOC (SWT or
successor) wouldn't need a sub class of dual voltage rolling stock,
so there would be advantages in terms of train diagramming.

I thought the intention was to 'extend' Hex to Staines, to enable
interchange with Reading/Windsor lines. You can only do that if you
25kv that short bit.

That is an additional proposal - but power supplies are really a technical
matter - they should really get the basic route for Airtrack sorted first I
reckon...

Doesn't the adjacent M25 have 'catenary'
lighting. Perhaps they should take away all lighting on that bit to
reduce environmental damage- or why just stop at removing lighting...

The phrase 'locking the stable door' etc springs to mind when discussing the
environment in that area, hemmed in as it is by the M25 and Heathrow
already.

Perhaps the local council might do well to look at examples such as the ECML
catenary over the Durham Viaduct, or the River Tweed's Royal Border Bridge,
and compare their wonderful local environment before launching into such a
pointless debate...

Paul S