On 17/03/2012 11:36, Paul Scott wrote:
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...

Looks like she'll be back in refit!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-17407435

For a few hours or days.

Articles like that really need to get a grip on reality - minor
collision damage, or 'berthing incidents' (often with tugs unfamiliar
with the type of vessel) happens all the time, to both warships and
merchant ships.

Much ado about nothing to be honest...


Oh I know, just amused me as we'd just been discussing her.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On 16/03/2012 23:30, wrote:
In , (Jim
Chisholm) wrote:

On 16/03/2012 00:17, wrote:

"The scheme is currently the largest civil engineering project in
Europe."
Really? Bigger than the Gotthard Base Tunnel?
But that isn't in Europe...
It is in Switzerland

Which was in Europe last time I looked. It's even in Schengen.

Last time I was there they wouldn't even except Euros
{Isn't there some other country a bit like that!}
but I travelled, last year. from Zurich to Milan, in part just to look
at the works and the wonderful views, before it is all in tunnel

Jim

In uk.railway Graeme Wall twisted the electrons to say:
On 16/03/2012 14:24, Recliner wrote:
I thought we didn't have any in-service fixed-wing aircraft carriers,
with or without aircraft?
We still have HMS Illustrious, though she's not in commission.

That was a fast decommissioning, she was only on her way back from an
exercise off the coast of Norway on the 16th!

Of course, we do have two under
construction for delivery in a few years.
One of which is scheduled to go direct from the slipway to the scrapyard.

Well, straight from slipway to the reserves ...

The bit that misses is the fact that the Argentine navy effectively
doesn't exist any more, they have no carrier, no operational subs, 3 old
frigates and 2 type 42 destroyers. Debatable whether any of those are
actually serviceable. They certainly don't have any heavy lift and
amphibious capability any more.

One of their type-42s is a (small) helicopter assault ship these days
rather than an air defence destroyer.

There's a presidential election later in the year and the locals are
****ed of with Christina. Also the economy is going down the drain
again so rattle the sabres and wave the Malvinas flags to distract the
peasantry.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

On 2012\03\17 14:21, Jim Chisholm wrote:

but I travelled, last year. from Zurich to Milan, in part just to look
at the works and the wonderful views, before it is all in tunnel

Is the present route being shut when the Gotthard Base Tunnel opens?

In article , (Jim
Chisholm) wrote:

On 16/03/2012 23:30, wrote:
In ,
(Jim Chisholm) wrote:

On 16/03/2012 00:17, wrote:

"The scheme is currently the largest civil engineering project in
Europe."
Really? Bigger than the Gotthard Base Tunnel?
But that isn't in Europe...
It is in Switzerland

Which was in Europe last time I looked. It's even in Schengen.

Last time I was there they wouldn't even except Euros
{Isn't there some other country a bit like that!}
but I travelled, last year. from Zurich to Milan, in part just to
look at the works and the wonderful views, before it is all in tunnel

The existing Gotthard tunnel is rather non-trivial in length.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
(Basil Jet) wrote:

On 2012\03\17 14:21, Jim Chisholm wrote:

but I travelled, last year. from Zurich to Milan, in part just to
look
at the works and the wonderful views, before it is all in tunnel

Is the present route being shut when the Gotthard Base Tunnel opens?

I don't think so but I expect services will be reduced. They were cut
somewhat when the road tunnel opening caused the car ferry trains to cease.
Goeschenen (the North portal station) is a shadow of its former self.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 13:42:14 -0500,
wrote:
I don't think so but I expect services will be reduced.

Will probably be an hourly EMU like the Loetschbergbahn, I'd think.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

Neil Williams wrote on 17 March 2012 20:24:58 ...
On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 13:42:14 -0500,
wrote:
I don't think so but I expect services will be reduced.

Will probably be an hourly EMU like the Loetschbergbahn, I'd think.

An hourly EMU service on Crossrail? Oh, you're talking about some
Alpine tunnel. Neil, if you must continue an OT sub-thread on u.t.l,
please either retain the context or change the subject.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

In article ,
(Richard J.) wrote:

Neil Williams wrote on 17 March 2012 20:24:58 ...
On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 13:42:14 -0500,
wrote:
I don't think so but I expect services will be reduced.

Will probably be an hourly EMU like the Loetschbergbahn, I'd think.

An hourly EMU service on Crossrail? Oh, you're talking about some
Alpine tunnel. Neil, if you must continue an OT sub-thread on u.t.l,
please either retain the context or change the subject.

I think I was the one who took us to the Alps. Sorry.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Mar 17, 9:58*pm, Robert Cox wrote:
On 2012-03-16 12:01:18 +0000, 77002 said:

On Mar 16, 7:49*am, furnessvale wrote:
On Thursday, March 15, 2012 10:53:04 AM UTC, Mizter T wrote:
Tunnel boring to begin from the Royal Oak portal heading eastwards under
central London.
So, it's finally really happening.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed and mouth shut. *How many false starts
did the Channel Tunnel have that actually involved tunnelling underway?

Several of the Crossrail stations have been under construction for
some time. *The ramps down to the portals at Paddington are
substantial.

Moreover, IIRC, the cost of Crossrail has reduced slightly.

Partially by planning to build trains that have few seats and no toilets.

IIRC Correctly it relates to depressed construction costs. Of course
it is early days yet. There may be cost overruns.

It is bad enough having 313s on the Coastway. Why would anyone want
to run trains from Reading to Shenfield sans half baths is beyond me.
This is the cost of involving TfL I suppose. Why cannot Crossrail be
run in a similar manner to Thameslink?

Moreover it is madness terminating so many Crossrail trains at
Paddington.