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....

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 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

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 Mon, 15 Jan 2018 17:24:22 +0000, Someone Somewhere wrote:
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).

That's more or less what they do with Eurostar between Brussels and Lille.

In article , Robin
writes
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.

Actually that shouldn't be hard.

A couple of years ago I was at Taipei airport with a bit of time to
kill. They've got one of those transit "rail" systems like the ones at
Stansted, Gatwick, and Heathrow T5. The train was two units, with one
used for groundside travel and the other for airside travel. There were
staggered platforms on opposite sides of the track for the two so that
the passenger flows remained completely separate.

--
Clive D.W. Feather

"Someone Somewhere" wrote in message
news
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? 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....

you are Michael Bell AICMFP

tim

On 15/01/2018 17:33, tim... wrote:


"Someone Somewhere" wrote in message

you are Michael Bell AICMFP

Who's that?