[original thread on uk.r - x-posted to utl]

On Apr 11, 8:35*pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:
[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-13042740]

Not entirely clear whether it's because BAA can't afford it, or whether
level crossing delays are an insuperable obstacle.

I've been intending to ask whether anyone's been closely following
developments on the Airtrack front for a little while - and now this
happens - most disappointing. I had wondered just how well this
project might progress, what with Philip Hammond being a local MP and
seemingly not being too keen on it - hardly an original thought I'm
sure.

On 11 Apr, 20:50, Mizter T wrote:
[original thread on uk.r - x-posted to utl]

On Apr 11, 8:35*pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-13042740]

Not entirely clear whether it's because BAA can't afford it, or whether
level crossing delays are an insuperable obstacle.

I've been intending to ask whether anyone's been closely following
developments on the Airtrack front for a little while - and now this
happens - most disappointing. I had wondered just how well this
project might progress, what with Philip Hammond being a local MP and
seemingly not being too keen on it - hardly an original thought I'm
sure.

IU wonder whether any part of Reading remodelling will now be
scrapped?....
Wasn't at least one platform meant to be for AirTrack?

"Chris" wrote in message
...

IU wonder whether any part of Reading remodelling will now be
scrapped?....
Wasn't at least one platform meant to be for AirTrack?

Yes - but I expect it would be useful anyway, as it allows far more
flexibility for the existing FGW and SWT trains, with or without Airtrack.
That's no guarantee the scope might not change though, as from what I can
see the work hasn't actually reached the point of no return.

Paul S

How about the PRT at T5, has that also been shelved? I wonder,
considering that it is almost two years delayed.

" wrote:

How about the PRT at T5, has that also been shelved? I wonder,
considering that it is almost two years delayed.


Airtrack, like the PRT, was probably no more than a ruse to get
planning permission for some major development work at Heathrow.

The PRT was going to revolutionise journeys to and from the Central
Area - the T5 installation was just a trial. But BAA got planning
permission for the redevelopment of the Central Area, so the PRT trial
seems to have worked for BAA, even if it has never carried any of
Terminal 5's Business Car Park users.

Airtrack was probably intended to help BAA gain planning permission
for the third runway and associated works. Now the coalition
government has made it crystal clear that the third runway project is
dead and buried, there's no point in Airtrack.

Of course there will be myriad other excuses why Airtrack could not go
ahead, but I believe that the coalition government's refusal of the
third runway is the primary cause of the cancellation. The recent
confirmation of the ruling that BAA must sell Stansted is another
possible factor in the decision to curtail investment.

On Apr 12, 12:53*am, Bruce wrote:
" wrote:

How about the PRT at T5, has that also been shelved? I wonder,
considering that it is almost two years delayed.

Airtrack, like the PRT, was probably no more than a ruse to get
planning permission for some major development work at Heathrow. *

The PRT was going to revolutionise journeys to and from the Central
Area - the T5 installation was just a trial. *But BAA got planning
permission for the redevelopment of the Central Area, so the PRT trial
seems to have worked for BAA, even if it has never carried any of
Terminal 5's Business Car Park users.

Airtrack was probably intended to help BAA gain planning permission
for the third runway and associated works. *Now the coalition
government has made it crystal clear that the third runway project is
dead and buried, there's no point in Airtrack.

Of course there will be myriad other excuses why Airtrack could not go
ahead, but I believe that the coalition government's refusal of the
third runway is the primary cause of the cancellation. *The recent
confirmation of the ruling that BAA must sell Stansted is another
possible factor in the decision to curtail investment.

I saw the PRT running last Thursday - at least 10 cars on the move
(empty)

On Apr 12, 7:16*am, ianh wrote:
On Apr 12, 12:53*am, Bruce wrote:









" wrote:

How about the PRT at T5, has that also been shelved? I wonder,
considering that it is almost two years delayed.

Airtrack, like the PRT, was probably no more than a ruse to get
planning permission for some major development work at Heathrow. *

The PRT was going to revolutionise journeys to and from the Central
Area - the T5 installation was just a trial. *But BAA got planning
permission for the redevelopment of the Central Area, so the PRT trial
seems to have worked for BAA, even if it has never carried any of
Terminal 5's Business Car Park users.

Airtrack was probably intended to help BAA gain planning permission
for the third runway and associated works. *Now the coalition
government has made it crystal clear that the third runway project is
dead and buried, there's no point in Airtrack.

Of course there will be myriad other excuses why Airtrack could not go
ahead, but I believe that the coalition government's refusal of the
third runway is the primary cause of the cancellation. *The recent
confirmation of the ruling that BAA must sell Stansted is another
possible factor in the decision to curtail investment.

I saw the PRT running last Thursday - at least 10 cars on the move
(empty)

Certainly running trials in Januray:
http://www.ultraprt.com/news/86/149/...vehicle-trips/

If it does open, it will be a personal incentive to use the business
parking rather than longstay.

In message
, at
23:16:06 on Mon, 11 Apr 2011, ianh
remarked:
I saw the PRT running last Thursday - at least 10 cars on the move
(empty)

Was it empty because it's not yet open for business, or because it was
quiet time of day?
--
Roland Perry

ianh wrote:
On Apr 12, 12:53*am, Bruce wrote:
" wrote:

How about the PRT at T5, has that also been shelved? I wonder,
considering that it is almost two years delayed.

Airtrack, like the PRT, was probably no more than a ruse to get
planning permission for some major development work at Heathrow. *

The PRT was going to revolutionise journeys to and from the Central
Area - the T5 installation was just a trial. *But BAA got planning
permission for the redevelopment of the Central Area, so the PRT trial
seems to have worked for BAA, even if it has never carried any of
Terminal 5's Business Car Park users.

Airtrack was probably intended to help BAA gain planning permission
for the third runway and associated works. *Now the coalition
government has made it crystal clear that the third runway project is
dead and buried, there's no point in Airtrack.

Of course there will be myriad other excuses why Airtrack could not go
ahead, but I believe that the coalition government's refusal of the
third runway is the primary cause of the cancellation. *The recent
confirmation of the ruling that BAA must sell Stansted is another
possible factor in the decision to curtail investment.

I saw the PRT running last Thursday - at least 10 cars on the move
(empty)


It was supposed to be opened to the public in autumn 2009. Or at
least opened to those of the public who use the T5 Business car park:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/5s5f87e

On 12/04/2011 07:16, ianh wrote:
On Apr 12, 12:53 am, wrote:
wrote:

How about the PRT at T5, has that also been shelved? I wonder,
considering that it is almost two years delayed.

Airtrack, like the PRT, was probably no more than a ruse to get
planning permission for some major development work at Heathrow.

The PRT was going to revolutionise journeys to and from the Central
Area - the T5 installation was just a trial. But BAA got planning
permission for the redevelopment of the Central Area, so the PRT trial
seems to have worked for BAA, even if it has never carried any of
Terminal 5's Business Car Park users.

Airtrack was probably intended to help BAA gain planning permission
for the third runway and associated works. Now the coalition
government has made it crystal clear that the third runway project is
dead and buried, there's no point in Airtrack.

Of course there will be myriad other excuses why Airtrack could not go
ahead, but I believe that the coalition government's refusal of the
third runway is the primary cause of the cancellation. The recent
confirmation of the ruling that BAA must sell Stansted is another
possible factor in the decision to curtail investment.

I saw the PRT running last Thursday - at least 10 cars on the move
(empty)

I've seen them running as well, also sans passengers. I saw one even in
an RBS wrap.