|
CTRL domestics delay
From the Independent:
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/tra...p?story=571591 High-speed commuter rail scheme delayed by a year By Barrie Clement, Transport Editor 13 October 2004 A £300m project to establish Britain's first super-fast commuter rail service will be delayed by at least a year amid concern that it could be a hugely expensive "white elephant", The Independent understands. The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations in Kent to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are still arguing over which rolling stock to order. Industry sources assert that there is "not a cat in hell's chance" of the new trains being ready on time - a prediction privately acknowledged by Whitehall officials. The Department for Transport has registered its dismay about the price of the new rolling stock, which has to be specially built to cope with the different electrification systems on the domestic and CTRL tracks. It is known that the cost of the 18 "sets" - locomotive and carriages - could be £200m. However, it is possible that more sets will be required, taking the final price tag, together with other costs, to £300m. Some government officials are also worried that the new services may fail to attract sufficient commuters. While a new station at Ebbsfleet, Gravesend, is expected to be popular with passengers because of its proximity to the A2 and the M25, there is a question-mark over other stations further away from the capital. The new trains would operate on three main routes. One of the new services is scheduled to start at Folkestone and another at Ramsgate. They will both then join the CTRL at Ashford International. From there they go via Ebbsfleet under the Thames to Stratford and on into London. Another is supposed to begin at Sittingbourne, run through the Medway towns then on to the CTRL at Ebbsfleet. They will all terminate at St Pancras. It is thought that the only way of guaranteeing full trains would be by keeping the cost of tickets down. Ministers still hope that a premium rate can be charged for the super-fast services, possibly double the rate paid on comparable routes on the far slower suburban network. Transport for London, which is responsible for networks in the capital, points out that part of the cost for the new super-fast services will be met by axing rush-hour trains using the existing lines. One source close to the rolling stock companies that will buy the trains and lease them to the train operator said that while the project was a "financial basket case", the Government seemed politically committed to it. On the existing domestic railway the fastest time between Gravesend and Charing Cross is 52 minutes. The new services would take about 15 minutes to get from Ebbsfleet to a newly enlarged St Pancras. In a recent letter to the Prime Minister, Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart, leader of Kent County Council, argued that the development of the new links was essential to the Government's plans for the development of the so-called Thames Gateway, which runs through north Kent to the coast. Sir Sandy called on Tony Blair, who has taken over the chairmanship of the cabinet sub-committee dealing with the development area, to "unlock the inertia" surrounding the high speed links. The Strategic Rail Authority (SRA), which took over responsibility from Connex for the ailing rail services in Kent, hopes to "re-privatise" the franchise next year. The new incumbent will be responsible for running the fast commuter services as well as existing routes. A spokesman for the SRA said that officials were working with the Department for Transport to get services started "as soon as possible". |
CTRL domestics delay
"Angus Bryant" wrote in message ...
From the Independent: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/tra...p?story=571591 High-speed commuter rail scheme delayed by a year By Barrie Clement, Transport Editor 13 October 2004 A £300m project to establish Britain's first super-fast commuter rail service will be delayed by at least a year amid concern that it could be a hugely expensive "white elephant", The Independent understands. What a surprise! The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations in Kent to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are still arguing over which rolling stock to order. Over engineered trains again. Would it not be eaiser to use the line at 160mph and add 5 minutes to the London Paris journey time? Industry sources assert that there is "not a cat in hell's chance" of the new trains being ready on time - a prediction privately acknowledged by Whitehall officials. The Department for Transport has registered its dismay about the price of the new rolling stock, which has to be specially built to cope with the different electrification systems on the domestic and CTRL tracks. It is known that the cost of the 18 "sets" - locomotive and carriages - could be £200m. However, it is possible that more sets will be required, taking the final price tag, together with other costs, to £300m. I've heard each set is six carriages = £1.8 - 2.7 million per carriage, compared with £1 million for the new South East Trains. Some government officials are also worried that the new services may fail to attract sufficient commuters. With expansion in Ashford and Medway they'll have enough. Especially if they're only six carriages. While a new station at Ebbsfleet, Gravesend, is expected to be popular with passengers because of its proximity to the A2 and the M25, there is a question-mark over other stations further away from the capital. The new trains would operate on three main routes. One of the new services is scheduled to start at Folkestone and another at Ramsgate. They will both then join the CTRL at Ashford International. Anyone know if they plan the join the units at Ashford? From there they go via Ebbsfleet under the Thames to Stratford and on into London. Another is supposed to begin at Sittingbourne, run through the Medway towns then on to the CTRL at Ebbsfleet. They will all terminate at St Pancras. It is thought that the only way of guaranteeing full trains would be by keeping the cost of tickets down. Ministers still hope that a premium rate can be charged for the super-fast services, possibly double the rate paid on comparable routes on the far slower suburban network. So after paying standard rates for the slowest trains in England (Europe?) they're expected to pay extra for the fastest. Double the rate would be inaffordable for too many commuters - how mnany people commute on the Heathrow Express? |
CTRL domestics delay
"Alex Terrell" wrote in message om... The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations in Kent to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are still arguing over which rolling stock to order. Over engineered trains again. Would it not be eaiser to use the line at 160mph and add 5 minutes to the London Paris journey time? It would be even easier to run it at 90mph and use MK1 EMUs (lots of them going spare now), but that would be missing the point of the line, wouldn't it? |
CTRL domestics delay
|
CTRL domestics delay
"Richard Thomas" wrote in message om... (Alex Terrell) wrote in message . com... "Angus Bryant" wrote in message ... From the Independent: snippity snip The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations in Kent to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are still arguing over which rolling stock to order. Over engineered trains again. Would it not be eaiser to use the line at 160mph and add 5 minutes to the London Paris journey time? I thought the CTRL DS trains were only supposed to be running at 140mph? Would it not be cheaper to upgrade the max 100 miles of track to the overhead wires system that's used on the CTRL? Then the trains wouldn't have to be so versatile... Stop trying to remove the barriers! You'll have the SRA after you... |
CTRL domestics delay
|
CTRL domestics delay
TP wrote to uk.transport.london on Thu, 14 Oct 2004:
(Alex Terrell) wrote: So after paying standard rates for the slowest trains in England (Europe?) they're expected to pay extra for the fastest. Double the rate would be inaffordable for too many commuters - how mnany people commute on the Heathrow Express? I am told there are a surprising number of Gatwick Express season ticket holders - a premium fare service that wasn't designed for commuters but seems to have attracted at least some. My parents, on the rare occasions they are going to London for the evening, always use it. They drive to Gatwick, park there, and carry on from Victoria via public transport, or possibly a taxi. I asked them once why they went on the rather more expensive service as opposed to Southern, which is not only cheaper (especially as they have Elderly Cards, or whatever they are called, but you know what I mean), but calls at destinations nearer to where they live. The answer was that the Gatwick services were reliably every 30 minutes throughout the night, so they didn't have to worry about catching the last train! And I think they have found the service more reliable than Southern (wouldn't be difficult!). The 30-mile drive home doesn't seem to worry them. -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 26 September 2004 |
CTRL domestics delay
|
CTRL domestics delay
|
CTRL domestics delay
"Bob" wrote in message ...
"Alex Terrell" wrote in message om... The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations in Kent to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are still arguing over which rolling stock to order. Over engineered trains again. Would it not be eaiser to use the line at 160mph and add 5 minutes to the London Paris journey time? It would be even easier to run it at 90mph and use MK1 EMUs (lots of them going spare now), but that would be missing the point of the line, wouldn't it? Slam door? I suspect train cost is proportional to kinetic energy, i.e rises with the square of the velocity. So there will be an optimum speed. It's about 70 miles St Pancras to the tunnel, so: 180 mph = 23 min 160 mph = 26 min 150 mph = 28 min 140 mph = 30 min 90 mph = 47 min Trains running at 140 mph adds only 5 min, but makes the commuter problem much, much easier. (Velocities are max, I know average speeds will be less, but the logic is the same). |
CTRL domestics delay
"Alex Terrell" wrote in message om... "Bob" wrote in message ... "Alex Terrell" wrote in message om... The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations in Kent to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are still arguing over which rolling stock to order. Over engineered trains again. Would it not be eaiser to use the line at 160mph and add 5 minutes to the London Paris journey time? It would be even easier to run it at 90mph and use MK1 EMUs (lots of them going spare now), but that would be missing the point of the line, wouldn't it? Slam door? I suspect train cost is proportional to kinetic energy, i.e rises with the square of the velocity. So there will be an optimum speed. It's about 70 miles St Pancras to the tunnel, so: 180 mph = 23 min 160 mph = 26 min 150 mph = 28 min 140 mph = 30 min 90 mph = 47 min Trains running at 140 mph adds only 5 min, but makes the commuter problem much, much easier. (Velocities are max, I know average speeds will be less, but the logic is the same). In my world, 30-23 is 7 not 5. Anyway, the point of the line is to cut as much as possible off the journey time between London and Paris / Brussels. Running trains at 186mph is the plan - your commuter trains at 140mph would get in the way. Since the technology exists for 186mph running, why not just build the damn trains instead of messing things up with a stupid fudge. Your kind of thinking is why things always turn to crap in this country. |
CTRL domestics delay
"Bob" wrote in message ... Anyway, the point of the line is to cut as much as possible off the journey time between London and Paris / Brussels. Running trains at 186mph is the plan - your commuter trains at 140mph would get in the way. Half the CTRL-DS trains will turn off at Ebbsfleet, and AIUI the line limit between St Pancras and Ebbsfleet will be 140 mph or less. Between Ebbsfleet and Ashford the peak demand for the forseeable future will be 4 tph for E* and 4 tph for CTRL-DS, and the line will be perfectly capable of accommodating these, even with a 186/140 mph speed mix. Peter |
CTRL domestics delay
"Peter Masson" wrote in message ...
"Bob" wrote in message ... Anyway, the point of the line is to cut as much as possible off the journey time between London and Paris / Brussels. Running trains at 186mph is the plan - your commuter trains at 140mph would get in the way. Half the CTRL-DS trains will turn off at Ebbsfleet, and AIUI the line limit between St Pancras and Ebbsfleet will be 140 mph or less. Between Ebbsfleet and Ashford the peak demand for the forseeable future will be 4 tph for E* and 4 tph for CTRL-DS, and the line will be perfectly capable of accommodating these, even with a 186/140 mph speed mix. Peter Good point - especially valid if they run the Eurostars in pairs, one to Brussels and one to Paris. I also think St Pancras to Ebbsfleet is mostly tunnel, where the trains are speed limited by the design of the tunnel. So why is this an issue? Why the delay? |
CTRL domestics delay
|
CTRL domestics delay
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message ... Good point - especially valid if they run the Eurostars in pairs, one to Brussels and one to Paris. They already do, the two services depart Waterloo 5 minutes apart, all to do with paths through the Channel Tunnel. IIRC one Eurostar requires two shuttle paths but a 'flight' of two Eurostars only requires 3 paths, thus saving a path that Eurotunnel can use either for shuttles or freight. This obviously has the same effect on the CTRL: 2 fast trains close together, then the next two 25 minutes later, should be fairly easy to flight the slower trains in the resulting gaps. They used to time E* like this, but since phase 1 of the CTRL opened this pairing of departures has been the exception rather than the rule. There was apparently a problem at Waterloo International with trying to load up to 1500 passengers on to two trains on opposite sides of an island platform - congestion and the risk of sending Brussels passengers to Paris and vv. In the current timetable the only paired departures seem to be: 0629 Paris/0634 Brussels 1039 Paris/1042 Brussels 1909FO Paris/1912 Brussels 1034Su Paris/1037Su Brussels. Peter |
CTRL domestics delay
"Peter Masson" wrote in message ... "Graeme Wall" wrote in message ... Good point - especially valid if they run the Eurostars in pairs, one to Brussels and one to Paris. They already do, the two services depart Waterloo 5 minutes apart, all to do with paths through the Channel Tunnel. IIRC one Eurostar requires two shuttle paths but a 'flight' of two Eurostars only requires 3 paths, thus saving a path that Eurotunnel can use either for shuttles or freight. This obviously has the same effect on the CTRL: 2 fast trains close together, then the next two 25 minutes later, should be fairly easy to flight the slower trains in the resulting gaps. They used to time E* like this, but since phase 1 of the CTRL opened this pairing of departures has been the exception rather than the rule. There was apparently a problem at Waterloo International with trying to load up to 1500 passengers on to two trains on opposite sides of an island platform - congestion and the risk of sending Brussels passengers to Paris and vv. In the current timetable the only paired departures seem to be: 0629 Paris/0634 Brussels 1039 Paris/1042 Brussels 1909FO Paris/1912 Brussels 1034Su Paris/1037Su Brussels. Peter Several end up being paired by the time they arrive at the tunnel, due to one having stopped at Ashford. Brian |
CTRL domestics delay
Arthur Figgis ] wrote in message . ..
[1]I can't imagine many people would commute /from/ Heathrow, owing to a lack of housing near the airport stations? Actually, commuting from Gatwick has more to do with plentiful convenient parking and frequent services than anything else. Call it 'Gatwick Parkway' if you will. An ex-colleague of mine used to live somewhere near East Grinstead, and park-and-ride from Gatwick was the easiest way to get to work in London. In the case of Heathrow, there are more options for park-and-ride, and indeed more options for using other stations as railheads for a commute -- usually at much less cost. Plus I'd guess that with Heathrow being more hemmed in and more prestigious, parking would be rather more expensive. I'd believe that a few people who live in the Staines direction and work in the Paddington area might park-and-ride from T4 though -- and if T5 gets decent parking with direct access off the M25, it might spur significant park-and-ride. |
CTRL domestics delay
"Peter Masson" wrote in message ...
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message ... Good point - especially valid if they run the Eurostars in pairs, one to Brussels and one to Paris. They already do, the two services depart Waterloo 5 minutes apart, all to do with paths through the Channel Tunnel. IIRC one Eurostar requires two shuttle paths but a 'flight' of two Eurostars only requires 3 paths, thus saving a path that Eurotunnel can use either for shuttles or freight. This obviously has the same effect on the CTRL: 2 fast trains close together, then the next two 25 minutes later, should be fairly easy to flight the slower trains in the resulting gaps. They used to time E* like this, but since phase 1 of the CTRL opened this pairing of departures has been the exception rather than the rule. There was apparently a problem at Waterloo International with trying to load up to 1500 passengers on to two trains on opposite sides of an island platform - congestion and the risk of sending Brussels passengers to Paris and vv. I hope they learn for the St Pancras design. It's not often that Eurostar trains have 750 passengers on them. |
CTRL domestics delay
"Bob" wrote in message ...
It's about 70 miles St Pancras to the tunnel, so: 180 mph = 23 min 160 mph = 26 min 150 mph = 28 min 140 mph = 30 min 90 mph = 47 min Trains running at 140 mph adds only 5 min, but makes the commuter problem much, much easier. (Velocities are max, I know average speeds will be less, but the logic is the same). In my world, 30-23 is 7 not 5. Sorry - but anyway, St Pancras to Ebbsfleet, and the North Downs tunnel, speeds will be limited by tunnel design. Assuming the same acceleration, a train desinged for 140 mph would only be a few minutes behind a 186 mph train by the time they get to Ashford. As pointed out elesewhere, this is well within the frequency requirements of the line, especially after Ebbsfleet. Anyway, the point of the line is to cut as much as possible off the journey time between London and Paris / Brussels. Running trains at 186mph is the plan - your commuter trains at 140mph would get in the way. Since the technology exists for 186mph running, why not just build the damn trains instead of messing things up with a stupid fudge. Your kind of thinking is why things always turn to crap in this country. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:35 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk