On Tue, 30 May 2017 11:57:49 -0500
wrote:
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message ,
at 04:07:40 on Tue, 30 May 2017, Paul Corfield
remarked:
I will be astonished if CR2 starts construction within the next 20
years. We will see a repeat of the nonsense that Crossrail had to
endure to get to the point of "spades in the ground". This is because
politicians are generally pretty stupid when it comes to transport
investment.

Or perhaps they realise that spending huge sums on something like CR2
brings less kudos than promising the same amount for the NHS, were
everyone in the country, not just a few toffs in Chelsea, can bask in
its alleged benefit.

The biggest set of beneficiaries are the 100 million passengers a year using
Waterloo who will either get alternatives or much needed extra capacity.

If all CR2 is is another line into waterloo then they can save half the
money and terminate it there. Also its been 10 YEARS since eurostar left
waterloo and STILL the international platforms are out of use and if you go
down there today you'll find the whole place is a building site. Quite what
they needed to do to perfectly servicable platforms that required taking 10
years to design and take half the international section apart is anyones guess.
If there was really concern about capacity at waterloo those platforms would
have been put back into use within 6 months.

--
Spud

In article , d () wrote:

On Tue, 30 May 2017 11:57:49 -0500
wrote:
In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message ,
at 04:07:40 on Tue, 30 May 2017, Paul Corfield
remarked:
I will be astonished if CR2 starts construction within the next 20
years. We will see a repeat of the nonsense that Crossrail had to
endure to get to the point of "spades in the ground". This is because
politicians are generally pretty stupid when it comes to transport
investment.

Or perhaps they realise that spending huge sums on something like CR2
brings less kudos than promising the same amount for the NHS, were
everyone in the country, not just a few toffs in Chelsea, can bask in
its alleged benefit.

The biggest set of beneficiaries are the 100 million passengers a year
using Waterloo who will either get alternatives or much needed extra
capacity.

If all CR2 is is another line into waterloo then they can save half the
money and terminate it there. Also its been 10 YEARS since eurostar left
waterloo and STILL the international platforms are out of use and if you
go down there today you'll find the whole place is a building site.
Quite what they needed to do to perfectly servicable platforms that
required taking 10 years to design and take half the international section
apart is anyones guess. If there was really concern about capacity at
waterloo those platforms would have been put back into use within 6
months.

Of course it isn't, any more than most of the 100 million annual Waterloo
passengers terminate their journeys there.

You also seem blissfully unaware of the approach track to Waterloo which is
where a lot of the work is needed to allow former International platforms
designed for infrequent arrivals and departures to be used for a frequent
suburban service. You do yourself no favours overlooking such factors.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Wed, 31 May 2017 04:39:38 -0500
wrote:
You also seem blissfully unaware of the approach track to Waterloo which is
where a lot of the work is needed to allow former International platforms
designed for infrequent arrivals and departures to be used for a frequent
suburban service. You do yourself no favours overlooking such factors.

It didn't take 10 years to build it in the first place so don't tell me its
taken 10 years to figure out how to rejig the track. The only reason its been
sitting idle so long is utter incompetance at Network Rail. And as this photo
proves they could have run trains into it ages ago if they'd wanted to without
having to rebuild the thing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:S...ng_platforms_2
1_and_22,_Waterloo_station_in_2015.jpg

--
Spud

In article , d () wrote:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:S...pying_platform
s_21_and_22,_Waterloo_station_in_2015.jpg

Do you not realise that the approach to those platforms was a single track
from and to the Linford St flyover?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Wed, 31 May 2017 11:10:10 -0500
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:S...pying_platform
s_21_and_22,_Waterloo_station_in_2015.jpg

Do you not realise that the approach to those platforms was a single track
from and to the Linford St flyover?

Thats south of vauxhall, it has no bearing on the approach to waterloo and it
doesn't take 10 years to fit some points between there and waterloo and in fact
if you look on google maps you'll see plenty connecting the eurostar lines to
the rest of the network.

--
Spud

In article , d () wrote:

On Wed, 31 May 2017 11:10:10 -0500
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:S...pying_platform
s_21_and_22,_Waterloo_station_in_2015.jpg

Do you not realise that the approach to those platforms was a single
track from and to the Linford St flyover?

Thats south of vauxhall, it has no bearing on the approach to
waterloo and it doesn't take 10 years to fit some points between
there and waterloo and in fact
if you look on google maps you'll see plenty connecting the eurostar
lines to the rest of the network.

Yes, the single line runs through platform 1 at Vauxhall.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Wednesday, 31 May 2017 12:46:15 UTC+1, wrote:
On Wed, 31 May 2017 04:39:38 -0500
wrote:
You also seem blissfully unaware of the approach track to Waterloo which is
where a lot of the work is needed to allow former International platforms
designed for infrequent arrivals and departures to be used for a frequent
suburban service. You do yourself no favours overlooking such factors.

It didn't take 10 years to build it in the first place so don't tell me its
taken 10 years to figure out how to rejig the track. The only reason its been
sitting idle so long is utter incompetance at Network Rail. And as this photo
proves they could have run trains into it ages ago if they'd wanted to without
having to rebuild the thing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:S...ng_platforms_2
1_and_22,_Waterloo_station_in_2015.jpg

You seem to think that Network Rail had independence to just splash £700m on reopening Waterloo. It didn't. The responsibility for the delay sits with the DfT who sat on their hands for years and did nothing about expanding capacity into Waterloo. It was only the NR / SET alliance that started to push things along in terms of new and longer trains and the associated infrastructure. If the Government don't put requirements in the HLOS / SOFA process then they don't get done. Government have sat back and left the South Western franchise to toddle along for many years despite the fact that there has been very strong growth in demand including heavy weekend loadings and contra peak commuter flows (e.g out towards Brentford and Kew in the AM peak due to the media businesses located there) growing.

The government then killed off the alliance by pulling NR back under DfT direct funding control. They then failed to secure a franchise extension with SWT (suspect both parties were rather awkward to be fair) so the franchise has had to be retendered. Bizarrely the handover occurs slap bang in the middle of the Waterloo blockade this August.

I have also read somewhere else that the flyover near Stewarts Lane that Eurostar used to reach the South Eastern line was funded with EU money. If the tracks to that viaduct are disconnected before a certain point in time then the funding has to be returned to the EU. That may also be a factor in the delay on this scheme. Note this last sentence is speculation on my part before people start frothing at the mouth and blaming Brussels.

--
Paul C
via Google

On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 01:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
You seem to think that Network Rail had independence to just splash =C2=A37=
00m on reopening Waterloo. It didn't. The responsibility for the delay si=

The points to NR exist, the platforms were perfectly servicable until they
started to demolish part them (for whatever reason, another excuse to waste
more taxpayers money) and train information boards were already fitted so apart
from putting in some standard ticket gates what exactly needed to be done to
"reopen" these platforms and use them? Answer - absolutely **** all. It was
just incompetance and indifference all round.

--
Spud

wrote:
On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 01:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
You seem to think that Network Rail had independence to just splash =C2=A37=
00m on reopening Waterloo. It didn't. The responsibility for the delay si=

The points to NR exist, the platforms were perfectly servicable until they
started to demolish part them (for whatever reason, another excuse to waste
more taxpayers money) and train information boards were already fitted so apart
from putting in some standard ticket gates what exactly needed to be done to
"reopen" these platforms and use them? Answer - absolutely **** all. It was
just incompetance and indifference all round.

As usual, your ignorance is causing you to grossly oversimplify things.

On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 15:11:16 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 01:49:09 -0700 (PDT)
Paul Corfield wrote:
You seem to think that Network Rail had independence to just splash =C2=A37=
00m on reopening Waterloo. It didn't. The responsibility for the delay si=

The points to NR exist, the platforms were perfectly servicable until they
started to demolish part them (for whatever reason, another excuse to waste
more taxpayers money) and train information boards were already fitted so
apart
from putting in some standard ticket gates what exactly needed to be done to
"reopen" these platforms and use them? Answer - absolutely **** all. It was
just incompetance and indifference all round.

As usual, your ignorance is causing you to grossly oversimplify things.

The infrastructure was in in place. Anything else is down to people.

--
Spud