On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 11:20:07 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 10:29:47 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
While its nice to see crossrail and this extension, it would be even better
if
the government would spend even a fraction of the cost of these on
improving
public transport in the northern cities.

This extension was largely funded by the local property developers, not the
government. Similarly, a large part of the Crossrail 2 funding will have to
come from London itself, either from property levies or direct
contributions from property developers.

All offset against earnings for tax reasons naturally.

Still, no reason that sort of scheme couldn't be used at least in part oop
narth. Manchester is pretty much the UKs 2nd city now economically if not
in population (sorry brum) and a bit more cash splashed that way could only
be
a good thing.

The Ordsall Chord is now almost complete so, at last, Piccadilly and
Victoria stations will have a direct heavy rail link.

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/runnin...ordsall-chord/

And, yes, before anyone says it, it's a pity that it came at the expense of
the MoSI link to the rail network.

Heavy rail is always a good thing, but tbh Manchester and half a dozen other
cities around the UK (particularly Bristol IMO, its almost gridlock there now)
need a proper metro system, not just trams that get stuck in traffic and never
get above 20mph in the city centres. Or if thats too expensive, pre-metro type
systems that are popular in europe - tram rolling stock that has street and
rail line running in the burbs but runs in tunnel through the centre. Rouen in
France is a good example of this and London had it at Holborn.

If europe can afford it so can we, that they don't get built is purely political
not financial.

On 2017\09\27 10:44, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6RWMaAtTOY

The tunnels have TWICE the cross section area of existing tube tunnels,
to allow a walkway!

Interesting. Of course, the DLR bored tunnels are similar. I wonder if the
Crossrail tunnels are also wide enough for a walkway, alongside the
mainline-size trains?

The larger tunnel will also reduce wind resistance and tunnel heating.


It looks like the public can get into a raised viewing platform over the
Battersea Power Station Station.

It would be nice if it's open to the public, but I suspect it isn't.


The sign says "Pedestrian and visitor entrance."
The viewing platform has one of those information boards that you get at
National Trust viewpoints. I doubt it would have that if you could only
get there on booked shepherded tours like the one Geoff had.

Basil Jet wrote:
On 2017\09\27 10:44, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6RWMaAtTOY

The tunnels have TWICE the cross section area of existing tube tunnels,
to allow a walkway!

Interesting. Of course, the DLR bored tunnels are similar. I wonder if the
Crossrail tunnels are also wide enough for a walkway, alongside the
mainline-size trains?

The larger tunnel will also reduce wind resistance and tunnel heating.


It looks like the public can get into a raised viewing platform over the
Battersea Power Station Station.

It would be nice if it's open to the public, but I suspect it isn't.


The sign says "Pedestrian and visitor entrance."
The viewing platform has one of those information boards that you get at
National Trust viewpoints. I doubt it would have that if you could only
get there on booked shepherded tours like the one Geoff had.


Ah, that sounds promising!

On 2017\09\27 08:14, Offramp wrote:
On Wednesday, 27 September 2017 08:01:47 UTC+1, Basil Jet wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6RWMaAtTOY

The tunnels have TWICE the cross section area of existing tube tunnels,
to allow a walkway!

Great idea! Walking along tracks is bloody awful.

No, walking on sleepers is bloody awful. Walking along the tarmac
between tram tracks is okay. The benefit of the walkway beside the train
is mainly for wheelchairs. We have doubled the amount of spoil from new
tube extensions just for wheelchair users.

Having said that, a diversity firework in a train in the new tunnel
might only cause serious injuries in one carriage, as the walkway would
let the blast dissipate.

He mentioned a possible future extension to Clapham Jct!

I'll believe that when I ride on it. Would their contract with the train
manufacturers allow extra 95 stock for that, or would it have to wait
until the 95s are replaced?

Basil Jet wrote:
On 2017\09\27 08:14, Offramp wrote:
On Wednesday, 27 September 2017 08:01:47 UTC+1, Basil Jet wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6RWMaAtTOY

The tunnels have TWICE the cross section area of existing tube tunnels,
to allow a walkway!

Great idea! Walking along tracks is bloody awful.

No, walking on sleepers is bloody awful. Walking along the tarmac
between tram tracks is okay. The benefit of the walkway beside the train
is mainly for wheelchairs. We have doubled the amount of spoil from new
tube extensions just for wheelchair users.

Having said that, a diversity firework in a train in the new tunnel
might only cause serious injuries in one carriage, as the walkway would
let the blast dissipate.

He mentioned a possible future extension to Clapham Jct!

I'll believe that when I ride on it. Would their contract with the train
manufacturers allow extra 95 stock for that, or would it have to wait
until the 95s are replaced?

More stock is being procured, both for the Battersea extension, and more
intensive services on the whole line. It will probably look similar to the
current 95 stock, but may be technically more advanced.

I don't think there's any prospect of a further extension to Clapham
Junction during the remaining life of the 95s.

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 13:37:14 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:56:30 on Wed, 27 Sep
2017, remarked:

Manchester is pretty much the UKs 2nd city now economically if not
in population (sorry brum) and a bit more cash splashed that way could only be
a good thing.

More than the cash splashed that way which currently subsidises their
trains at 35p per passenger mile?

I don't really care tbh. The regional cities need to be opened up for busines
far more than they are and for that you need decent public transport. They
figured this out in europe decades ago but it seems to elude british
governments.

It can't be too expensive to construct a really modern Wupperthal Dangelbahn around these big cities.

In message , at 15:50:19 on Wed, 27 Sep
2017, remarked:

Manchester is pretty much the UKs 2nd city now economically if not
in population (sorry brum) and a bit more cash splashed that way could only be
a good thing.

More than the cash splashed that way which currently subsidises their
trains at 35p per passenger mile?

I don't really care tbh. The regional cities need to be opened up for busines
far more than they are and for that you need decent public transport. They
figured this out in europe decades ago but it seems to elude british
governments.

Manchester has a vast railway network, but the locals either don't use
it, or won't pay for it.

Train users in London, like yourself, are paying for much of it.
--
Roland Perry

"Offramp" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 27 September 2017 08:01:47 UTC+1, Basil Jet wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6RWMaAtTOY

The tunnels have TWICE the cross section area of existing tube tunnels,
to allow a walkway!

Great idea! Walking along tracks is bloody awful. If there is an evac then
a walkway will speed things up enormously. Same with getting mechanics to
problem scenes.

and how many times a decade is there an evacuation?

and, assuming a theoretical equal chance [1] of that happening anywhere in
the network

how many times a century will an evacuation occur at this specific location?

tim

[1] which may not be correct but I have no way of determining otherwise

"Offramp" wrote in message
...
It can't be too expensive to construct a really modern Wupperthal
Dangelbahn around these big cities.

but not all of them have suitable rivers

tim