New York Times on Crossrail
 

On Tue, 1 Aug 2017 15:43:28 +0100
"Richard J." wrote:
e27002 wrote on 01 Aug 2017 at 13:03 ...
On Tuesday, August 1, 2017 at 9:13:40 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Tuesday, August 1, 2017 at 12:15:44 AM UTC+1, Nobody wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017 16:33:50 -0600, Arthur Conan Doyle
wrote:

Basil Jet wrote:

The NYT is infamous for its bias. I'm surprised they didn't manage to
fit blaming Trump for something into it.

This. The photos were nice, but I'd ignore any of the words. The NYT is
still
hoping someone will step in and cancel Brexit.

As probably do a fair swag of Brexiteers suffering from "OMG, what
'ave we done?"

Mind you, I'm happy: you lot carved about $CAD1,000 off a $5,800
cruise, denominated in GBP.

This Brexiteer is not suffering at all. Nor any of my friends.
We do all notice that many Remainers seem to want the U. K to
fail in the cowardly new world.

Plus one.

Could we have that in proper English, please?
Otherwise, I'm not sure if one of these definitions applies ...

Oh come on, you can't be that out of touch. Its +1 moderation points as used
on numerous web forums.

--
Spud

New York Times on Crossrail
 

eastender wrote:


So why did they run this the other day:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/o...news.html?_r=0


The Good News on Brexit They're Not Telling You

By DANIEL HANNAN


That's an Op/Ed piece that does not reflect the NYT editorial position:

Daniel Hannan (@DanielJHannan), Conservative of South East England, is a member
of the European Parliament and the author, most recently, of “What Next: How to
Get the Best from Brexit.”

Occasionaly they'll let an opposing view through, just to make themselves feel
better.

Similarly, Modern Railways has published an anti HS2 retort
from Christian Wolmar to a silly and juvenile attack from
Ian Walmsley in a previous edition.

I don't think Modern Railways is opposed to HS2.

(For what it's worth, I normally agree with Ian Walmsley and
disagree strongly with Christian Wolmar)

New York Times on Crossrail
 

Robin9 wrote:

Similarly, Modern Railways has published an anti HS2 retort
from Christian Wolmar to a silly and juvenile attack from
Ian Walmsley in a previous edition.

I don't think Modern Railways is opposed to HS2.

(For what it's worth, I normally agree with Ian Walmsley and
disagree strongly with Christian Wolmar)

Of course Wolmar normally writes for a rival railway mag, in which he
regularly attacks HS2 in between his political commentaries. Rail is also
pro-HS2 and pro-privatisation, but lets Womar take the opposite position on
both.

New York Times on Crossrail
 

On Wed, 2 Aug 2017 09:49:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Robin9 wrote:

Similarly, Modern Railways has published an anti HS2 retort
from Christian Wolmar to a silly and juvenile attack from
Ian Walmsley in a previous edition.

I don't think Modern Railways is opposed to HS2.

(For what it's worth, I normally agree with Ian Walmsley and
disagree strongly with Christian Wolmar)

Of course Wolmar normally writes for a rival railway mag, in which he
regularly attacks HS2 in between his political commentaries. Rail is also
pro-HS2 and pro-privatisation, but lets Womar take the opposite position on
both.

Meanwhile there's no money left in the kitty for the MML electrification
north of bedford or improvements and electrification of various northern
routes. I can't help thinking someone in the government wants a legacy project
to look back on, rather than something thats good value for money and actually
useful to the most people.

--
Spud

New York Times on Crossrail
 

wrote:
On Wed, 2 Aug 2017 09:49:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Robin9 wrote:

Similarly, Modern Railways has published an anti HS2 retort
from Christian Wolmar to a silly and juvenile attack from
Ian Walmsley in a previous edition.

I don't think Modern Railways is opposed to HS2.

(For what it's worth, I normally agree with Ian Walmsley and
disagree strongly with Christian Wolmar)

Of course Wolmar normally writes for a rival railway mag, in which he
regularly attacks HS2 in between his political commentaries. Rail is also
pro-HS2 and pro-privatisation, but lets Womar take the opposite position on
both.

Meanwhile there's no money left in the kitty for the MML electrification
north of bedford or improvements and electrification of various northern
routes.

I'm pretty sure that the MML will be electrified to Kettering (and Corby).
It's the sections north of there that are now off the agenda yet again.

I can't help thinking someone in the government wants a legacy project
to look back on, rather than something thats good value for money and actually
useful to the most people.

Unfortunately, electrifying and enhancing our Victorian main lines is not
turning out to be good value for money. A new build line to enhance
capacity and speed might actually be much better value for money.

New York Times on Crossrail
 

On Wed, 2 Aug 2017 10:04:23 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 2 Aug 2017 09:49:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Robin9 wrote:

Similarly, Modern Railways has published an anti HS2 retort
from Christian Wolmar to a silly and juvenile attack from
Ian Walmsley in a previous edition.

I don't think Modern Railways is opposed to HS2.

(For what it's worth, I normally agree with Ian Walmsley and
disagree strongly with Christian Wolmar)

Of course Wolmar normally writes for a rival railway mag, in which he
regularly attacks HS2 in between his political commentaries. Rail is also
pro-HS2 and pro-privatisation, but lets Womar take the opposite position on
both.

Meanwhile there's no money left in the kitty for the MML electrification
north of bedford or improvements and electrification of various northern
routes.

I'm pretty sure that the MML will be electrified to Kettering (and Corby).
It's the sections north of there that are now off the agenda yet again.

Whats special about kettering compared to Nottingham and Derby which are
much larger connurbations?

I can't help thinking someone in the government wants a legacy project
to look back on, rather than something thats good value for money and
actually
useful to the most people.

Unfortunately, electrifying and enhancing our Victorian main lines is not
turning out to be good value for money. A new build line to enhance
capacity and speed might actually be much better value for money.

HS2 isn't much use if you want to get across the pennines in a hurry.
And yes, I imagine sticking up catenary can be a problem in restrictive tunnels
and having to raise bridges. Of course if the HSE wasn't so against laying
any more 3rd rail (which is perfectly satisfactory for commuter lines) the
whole problem would go away. It doesn't have to be the type of 3rd rail in the
SE or liverpool, it could be much safer bottom contact as on the DLR.

--
Spud

New York Times on Crossrail
 

On Wednesday, August 2, 2017 at 10:57:43 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Wed, 2 Aug 2017 09:49:26 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Robin9 wrote:

Similarly, Modern Railways has published an anti HS2 retort
from Christian Wolmar to a silly and juvenile attack from
Ian Walmsley in a previous edition.

I don't think Modern Railways is opposed to HS2.

(For what it's worth, I normally agree with Ian Walmsley and
disagree strongly with Christian Wolmar)

Of course Wolmar normally writes for a rival railway mag, in which he
regularly attacks HS2 in between his political commentaries. Rail is also
pro-HS2 and pro-privatisation, but lets Womar take the opposite position on
both.

Meanwhile there's no money left in the kitty for the MML electrification
north of bedford or improvements and electrification of various northern
routes. I can't help thinking someone in the government wants a legacy project
to look back on, rather than something thats good value for money and actually
useful to the most people.

+1 :-)

New York Times on Crossrail
 

In message , at 10:23:22 on Wed, 2 Aug
2017, d remarked:

I'm pretty sure that the MML will be electrified to Kettering (and Corby).
It's the sections north of there that are now off the agenda yet again.

Whats special about kettering compared to Nottingham and Derby which are
much larger connurbations?

Only that it's the junction to Corby. Frankly, they should implement one
of those battery EMUs shuttling between Corby and Kettering - with
charging wires at either station - and leave north of Bedford to
diesels. At least until they can find the money to extend Thameslink to
Leicester.
--
Roland Perry

New York Times on Crossrail
 

On Wed, 2 Aug 2017 11:46:40 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:23:22 on Wed, 2 Aug
2017, d remarked:

I'm pretty sure that the MML will be electrified to Kettering (and Corby).
It's the sections north of there that are now off the agenda yet again.

Whats special about kettering compared to Nottingham and Derby which are
much larger connurbations?

Only that it's the junction to Corby. Frankly, they should implement one

So whats special about Corby? They're both past their best midlands towns
without much going for them.

of those battery EMUs shuttling between Corby and Kettering - with
charging wires at either station - and leave north of Bedford to
diesels. At least until they can find the money to extend Thameslink to
Leicester.

Either you find more paths for extra trains or no one south of Luton will
be able to get on in the rush hour if you extended Thameslink that far north.
Plus the timetable would probably become a work of fiction.

--
Spud