On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 16:29:10 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
Arguably a second runway at Gatwick is more practical and a lot cheaper
than a third at Heathrow. But the former directly affects more tory
voters than the latter.


The commission found that both the costs and the benefits were lower at
Gatwick, but Heathrow was better overall.

For whom exactly other than Heathrow Plc and its spanish owners?

On 15/01/2018 16:29, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 15/01/2018 11:04, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 15/01/2018 09:19, Recliner wrote:
Here's the latest hyperloop hype from CES, now proposed as a means of
providing very fast links between Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted, instead
of a new runway:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/01/14/build-heathrow-gatwick-hyperloop-instead-third-runway-says-branson/


snip hyperloop ********

Whilst the idea of linking all the London airports is sensible and
reasonable, how does it do away with the need for a third runway?Â* Last
time I checked slots were at a premium at all London airports and it's
not like they're being used for inter-London flights is it?

Now, the third runway could be a second runway at Gatwick or whatever,
but you still need more overall capacity surely?

Arguably a second runway at Gatwick is more practical and a lot cheaper
than a third at Heathrow. But the former directly affects more tory
voters than the latter.


The commission found that both the costs and the benefits were lower at
Gatwick, but Heathrow was better overall.


But isn't the point of this discussion that if (and it's a whopping
great if) using the Hyperloop technology could give us inter-airport
transfers in the time it typically takes to change terminals in an
airport then that might change the dynamics and cost-benefit analysis of
where to put additional airport capacity in the overall London area.

Personally I'm still a fan of building an aiport in the middle of the
Severn estuary on a tidal barrage and connecting that with Heathrow (and
Gatwick/Stansted/Luton) via Hyperloop along the Great Western alignment
(which is pretty flat and straight). Benefits would be that the airport
would generate a massive amount of green power for the rest of the
country, you'd gain a further west road link between South Wales and the
South West (you might as well put a big road on top of the tidal barrage
as well), the Hyperloop would improve transport to South Wales / South
West, and you'd have an aiport that was marginally closer to the USA but
most importantly could be far enough from population centres that it
could operate 24x7 with impunity....

wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jan 2018 16:29:10 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
Arguably a second runway at Gatwick is more practical and a lot cheaper
than a third at Heathrow. But the former directly affects more tory
voters than the latter.


The commission found that both the costs and the benefits were lower at
Gatwick, but Heathrow was better overall.

For whom exactly other than Heathrow Plc and its spanish owners?

They weren't measuring benefits to airport owners.

There is no Heathrow plc. If you actually meant Heathrow Airport Holdings
Limited, it's only 25% Spanish-owned.

Gatwick is also foreign-owned.

On 15/01/2018 16:40, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 15/01/2018 16:29, Recliner wrote:
snip

But isn't the point of this discussion that if (and it's a whopping
great if) using the Hyperloop technology could give us inter-airport
transfers in the time it typically takes to change terminals in an
airport then that might change the dynamics and cost-benefit analysis of
where to put additional airport capacity in the overall London area.

But could hyperloop deliver this for airside transfers? Many passengers
at an international hub don't want a transfer that requires
immigration+baggage collection+customs followed by baggage
drop+security+emigration. Not impossible but segregating "airside"
passengers (and their through-booked baggage) securely on hyperloop
seems to me non-trivial.


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Robin wrote:
On 15/01/2018 16:40, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 15/01/2018 16:29, Recliner wrote:
snip

But isn't the point of this discussion that if (and it's a whopping
great if) using the Hyperloop technology could give us inter-airport
transfers in the time it typically takes to change terminals in an
airport then that might change the dynamics and cost-benefit analysis of
where to put additional airport capacity in the overall London area.

But could hyperloop deliver this for airside transfers? Many passengers
at an international hub don't want a transfer that requires
immigration+baggage collection+customs followed by baggage
drop+security+emigration. Not impossible but segregating "airside"
passengers (and their through-booked baggage) securely on hyperloop
seems to me non-trivial.

Yes, that's a good point. As far as possible, air-side transfers are in a
single terminal, with automatic baggage transfers, and that's tedious
enough. If you had to arrive landside and make your way to the separate
Hyperloop terminal, with your luggage, that would be truly painful. Then
you'd have to do it all in reverse at the other airport.

On 15/01/2018 16:29, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 15/01/2018 11:04, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 15/01/2018 09:19, Recliner wrote:
Here's the latest hyperloop hype from CES, now proposed as a means of
providing very fast links between Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted, instead
of a new runway:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/01/14/build-heathrow-gatwick-hyperloop-instead-third-runway-says-branson/



Extracts:

His aspirations to send tourists into space have been notorious for
setbacks, missed deadlines and broken promises. However, Sir Richard
Branson’s latest venture believes it has the answer to Britain’s runway
expansion dilemma, proposing a system of high-speed “hyperloops� to ferry
passengers between London’s airports.

Virgin Hyperloop One, a California start-up chaired by the
billionaire, has
been studying the possibility of a series of high-speed tubes between
Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted which it says would allow passengers to
travel between the airports in as little as five minutes.

It says the hyperloop, a proposed transport system that involves
futuristic
pods travelling through low pressure tubes at speeds of up to 670 mph,
would effectively turn London’s three major airports into one “hub�.
Virgin
Hyperloop One’s chief executive Rob Lloyd said the plan could remove the
need for a third runway at Heathrow.

“[We’re] thinking about how technology could make it a much different
proposition than the third runway. “You’d think of this as moving between
terminals instead of moving between airports,� he said.

Lloyd said the company’s technical advisory board, made up of researchers
and infrastructure experts, had assessed the possibility of hyperloops
connecting the airports. They estimated it would take five minutes
between
Heathrow and Gatwick, and seven to Stansted.

…

However, the idea has been mocked as the epitome of Silicon Valley
blue-sky
thinking, with cost estimates already soaring above Musk’s predictions
and
engineers warning of the potential safety risks. The only successful
tests
of the technology to date have been unmanned trials on Virgin Hyperloop
One’s 500-metre track in the Nevada desert, which have reached a maximum
speed of 240 mph.

It has drawn inevitable comparisons to Virgin Galactic, Sir Richard’s
space
tourism venture, which originally planned to start flights in 2011 but
has
been repeatedly hit by delays.

Virgin Hyperloop One wants to have a fully-working hyperloop transporting
cargo by 2021, with passengers set to follow soon after, although the
company has not yet signed a deal to build a track and would have several
regulatory barriers to overcome.

In December, a paper published by the Department for Transport said a
hyperloop in the UK would be “at least two decades away�. The DfT’s
science
advisory council said potential problems with emergency braking, power
failures and cyber attacks, as well as the need for largely straight
routes, presented a number of “technical challenges�.

… continues

Whilst the idea of linking all the London airports is sensible and
reasonable, how does it do away with the need for a third runway?Â* Last
time I checked slots were at a premium at all London airports and it's
not like they're being used for inter-London flights is it?

Now, the third runway could be a second runway at Gatwick or whatever,
but you still need more overall capacity surely?

Arguably a second runway at Gatwick is more practical and a lot cheaper
than a third at Heathrow. But the former directly affects more tory
voters than the latter.


The commission found that both the costs and the benefits were lower at
Gatwick, but Heathrow was better overall.


AIUI that analysis ignored the effects of the disruption to the M25 and
M4 over a number of years while the junction was rebuilt and the
motorways moved to tunnels. No such work is needed at Gatwick.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 15/01/2018 16:57, Robin wrote:
On 15/01/2018 16:40, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 15/01/2018 16:29, Recliner wrote:
snip

But isn't the point of this discussion that if (and it's a whopping
great if) using the Hyperloop technology could give us inter-airport
transfers in the time it typically takes to change terminals in an
airport then that might change the dynamics and cost-benefit analysis
of where to put additional airport capacity in the overall London area.

But could hyperloop deliver this for airside transfers?Â* Many passengers
at an international hub don't want a transfer that requires
immigration+baggage collection+customs followed by baggage
drop+security+emigration.Â* Not impossible but segregating "airside"
passengers (and their through-booked baggage) securely on hyperloop
seems to me non-trivial.



Airside passengers board cars with doors only on one side, other
passengers board cars with doors only on the other side. Stations are
designed accordingly.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 15/01/2018 17:16, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 15/01/2018 16:57, Robin wrote:
On 15/01/2018 16:40, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 15/01/2018 16:29, Recliner wrote:
snip

But isn't the point of this discussion that if (and it's a whopping
great if) using the Hyperloop technology could give us inter-airport
transfers in the time it typically takes to change terminals in an
airport then that might change the dynamics and cost-benefit analysis
of where to put additional airport capacity in the overall London area.

But could hyperloop deliver this for airside transfers?Â* Many
passengers at an international hub don't want a transfer that requires
immigration+baggage collection+customs followed by baggage
drop+security+emigration.Â* Not impossible but segregating "airside"
passengers (and their through-booked baggage) securely on hyperloop
seems to me non-trivial.



Airside passengers board cars with doors only on one side, other
passengers board cars with doors only on the other side.Â* Stations are
designed accordingly.

Yes - surely it's not beyond the wit of man that certain cars (for want
of a different word) are designated air-side, land-side, luggage or
cargo (presumably the latter two may need to transfer terminals/airports
too) and routed to different end-points (which for want of a different
words we'll call stations).

Does Hyperloop allow branches as surely that's needed. I also assume it
can handle a significant capacity in a reasonable time (what's the peak
passenger rate at Heathrow? presumably 15K per hour or more)

On 15/01/2018 17:06, Recliner wrote:
Robin wrote:
On 15/01/2018 16:40, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 15/01/2018 16:29, Recliner wrote:
snip

But isn't the point of this discussion that if (and it's a whopping
great if) using the Hyperloop technology could give us inter-airport
transfers in the time it typically takes to change terminals in an
airport then that might change the dynamics and cost-benefit analysis of
where to put additional airport capacity in the overall London area.

But could hyperloop deliver this for airside transfers? Many passengers
at an international hub don't want a transfer that requires
immigration+baggage collection+customs followed by baggage
drop+security+emigration. Not impossible but segregating "airside"
passengers (and their through-booked baggage) securely on hyperloop
seems to me non-trivial.

Yes, that's a good point. As far as possible, air-side transfers are in a
single terminal, with automatic baggage transfers, and that's tedious
enough. If you had to arrive landside and make your way to the separate
Hyperloop terminal, with your luggage, that would be truly painful. Then
you'd have to do it all in reverse at the other airport.


But that is done in some other countries, albeit same airport but
different terminals. But with a five minute transit time (!!)
effectively Thiefrow, Gatwick and Stanstead would become three terminals
of "London Airport".

--
Colin

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
news
On 15/01/2018 14:33, tim... wrote:


"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
news
On 15/01/2018 11:04, Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 15/01/2018 09:19, Recliner wrote:
Here's the latest hyperloop hype from CES, now proposed as a means of
providing very fast links between Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted,
instead
of a new runway:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/01/14/build-heathrow-gatwick-hyperloop-instead-third-runway-says-branson/

Extracts:

His aspirations to send tourists into space have been notorious for
setbacks, missed deadlines and broken promises. However, Sir Richard
Branson’s latest venture believes it has the answer to Britain’s
runway
expansion dilemma, proposing a system of high-speed “hyperloops� to
ferry
passengers between London’s airports.

Virgin Hyperloop One, a California start-up chaired by the
billionaire, has
been studying the possibility of a series of high-speed tubes between
Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted which it says would allow passengers to
travel between the airports in as little as five minutes.

It says the hyperloop, a proposed transport system that involves
futuristic
pods travelling through low pressure tubes at speeds of up to 670 mph,
would effectively turn London’s three major airports into one “hub�.
Virgin
Hyperloop One’s chief executive Rob Lloyd said the plan could remove
the
need for a third runway at Heathrow.

“[We’re] thinking about how technology could make it a much different
proposition than the third runway. “You’d think of this as moving
between
terminals instead of moving between airports,� he said.

Lloyd said the company’s technical advisory board, made up of
researchers
and infrastructure experts, had assessed the possibility of hyperloops
connecting the airports. They estimated it would take five minutes
between
Heathrow and Gatwick, and seven to Stansted.

…

However, the idea has been mocked as the epitome of Silicon Valley
blue-sky
thinking, with cost estimates already soaring above Musk’s predictions
and
engineers warning of the potential safety risks. The only successful
tests
of the technology to date have been unmanned trials on Virgin
Hyperloop
One’s 500-metre track in the Nevada desert, which have reached a
maximum
speed of 240 mph.

It has drawn inevitable comparisons to Virgin Galactic, Sir Richard’s
space
tourism venture, which originally planned to start flights in 2011 but
has
been repeatedly hit by delays.

Virgin Hyperloop One wants to have a fully-working hyperloop
transporting
cargo by 2021, with passengers set to follow soon after, although the
company has not yet signed a deal to build a track and would have
several
regulatory barriers to overcome.

In December, a paper published by the Department for Transport said a
hyperloop in the UK would be “at least two decades away�. The DfT’s
science
advisory council said potential problems with emergency braking, power
failures and cyber attacks, as well as the need for largely straight
routes, presented a number of “technical challenges�.

… continues

Whilst the idea of linking all the London airports is sensible and
reasonable, how does it do away with the need for a third runway? Last
time I checked slots were at a premium at all London airports and it's
not like they're being used for inter-London flights is it?

Now, the third runway could be a second runway at Gatwick or whatever,
but you still need more overall capacity surely?

Arguably a second runway at Gatwick is more practical and a lot cheaper
than a third at Heathrow. But the former directly affects more tory
voters than the latter.

in seats that they have zero chance of losing, no matter how much they
**** them off

The day of the guaranteed safe seat is probably over.

In the predominately rural SE [1]?

Nah

The only seat that Labour have a chance of winning is Crawley, which
paradoxically is too close to the airport to suffer from overflying
aircraft.

Historically the LibDems were the potential alternative, but currently they
are a spent force

Canterbury was an aberration caused by a student campaign. Not repeatable
elsewhere.

tim

[1] so that's everywhere except Southampton, Portsmouth, Reading, Brighton,
Medway and Thanet.