"John Rowland" wrote in
:

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...

once you do away with customs, immigration
and insecurity. build a mezanine over the current
sunken area before the barrier line and have level access to the
platforms as per the rest of the station.

I suspect customs etc at Waterloo will be mothballed rather than
removed, because they will want somewhere to offload Johnny Foreigner
if an incident closes the Stratford / St Pancras line.


Can't see this happening. The new line will have Ashford, Ebbsfleet and
Stratford for detraining is there is a problem at St. Pancras and I'd be
surprised if the 3rd rail capability of the 373's wasn't removed at the
first opportunity.

In article ,
(Roland Perry) wrote:

In message , at 10:42:24 on Tue, 16
Nov 2004, Clive D. W. Feather remarked:
In article , M.Whitson
writes
Paris/Brussels bound passengers from more than 40 miles
north of London will find it far more convenient and less time
consuming to
use their regional airport - Stanstead, Manchester, Liverpool
Newcastle etc.

Not so: from Cambridge/Peterborough it is more convenient - even if
slightly slower - to use Eurostar than to fly.

Thanks to CT's pathetic service to Stansted.

Why do you say pathetic? I see it day to day and it seems pretty reliable
these days.

And that's with the present arrangements; the move to St.Pancras will
probably save me an hour.

I agree, E* every time.

Agree.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

"Paul Cummins" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Dave Liney) wrote:

None of Surrey is south-easy of London.

Lingfield is south-east of London and in Surrey.

Lingfield is due south of London City airport, and is one of the most
easterly points in Surrey.

Lingfield is both south and east of the City and the geographical centre of
Greater London. And the reason I choose it was because it was the most
easterly point I could remember. My post was a bit tongue in cheek.

Kent is south-east of London, Surrey is south and Southwest.

You don't say.

Dave

In message , at
11:40:00 on Wed, 17 Nov 2004, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
Thanks to CT's pathetic service to Stansted.

Why do you say pathetic? I see it day to day and it seems pretty reliable
these days.

Even CT say (in the timetable) to allow an *extra* 2 hrs in between
train arrival and check-in.

It has no service on a Sunday morning, and only a sporadic one at other
times. Trains are very liable to be cancelled southbound at Cambridge,
when late running (which obviously also cancels the corresponding
northbound one from the airport).

--
Roland Perry

(Kapitan Klink) wrote in message . com...
(Alex Terrell) wrote in message . com...
Considerable debate took place over whether to change the station's
name because the fourth-century saint sparked little recognition among
the French and Belgians but St Pancras was a widely known name in
Britain.


Maybe Brits think that because in France they spell his name
'Pancrace' - there is a district of Nice called St-Pancrace that I
know personally, and a quick Google reveals places or districts named
after him in the Dordogne (near Brantôme), Rouen, the Alps, Provence,
in fact there are dozens all over France - more than in England! I
would not exactly call that "little recogised".

The only reason people in Britain know the name St. Pancras is because
there is a London terminus of that name. Only the most dedicated
hagiologists will have any clue about the saint himself.

Andy Kirkham
Glasgow

In message , Mrs Redboots
writes

I don't know about Mait001, but I was assuming these trains would not
stop everywhere, just at major stations - Richmond perhaps, but not
Barnes! And maybe not even Richmond.... first stop Feltham, perhaps,
and make the most of the link to Heathrow?

If they didn't stop at Putney, Richmond and Twickenham they wouldn't
replace the existing service, they would have to be additional - and
there is absolutely no way that line can take a more intense service
west of Barnes.
--
Paul Terry

Peter Masson wrote:
[Eurostar platforms]
It would not be difficult to use these platforms for Windsor Line trains,
making it much less likely for any trains to have to queue up outside
Waterloo waiting for platforms. But that wonn't make use of the platform
length - it would probably be too expensive to extend any Windsor line
station to take 12x20m trains, let alone 16- or 20-car.

What were platforms 20-24 used for before construction of the Eurostar
terminal? They looked forlorn and neglected the only time I remember seeing
them in the late eighties. Was there a canopy that was demolished to make
way for Eurostar?

Theo

Theo Markettos wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 17 Nov 2004:

What were platforms 20-24 used for before construction of the Eurostar
terminal? They looked forlorn and neglected the only time I remember seeing
them in the late eighties. Was there a canopy that was demolished to make
way for Eurostar?

Surely they were being built in the late 80s? Actually, I think they
were built earlier - early 80s - but the construction of the Channel
Tunnel was delayed so that they did sit mothballed for awhile.
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 6 November 2004 with new photos

Terry Harper wrote:
"Solar Penguin" wrote in message
...

--- Terry Harper said:


I didn't say South East London, I said South-East of London, which
covers large parts of Surrey, all of Kent and a large part of Sussex.
Those who have the misfortune to live in Chairman Ken's domain
have to put up with the consequences.

What has Ken got to do with the decision to close Waterloo
International? I didn't think TfL's authority covered international
services. Or is this just a cheap party political shot that's got
nothing to with the discussion...?

No, it's a comment on the consequences of living in Greater London on one's
choice of transport. The word, if it exists, is probably centrospective.

Personally, I'd rather have Ken running my transport than the DfT, or
whatever county council. At least things get done.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

John Rowland wrote:
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

I believe that depends on the developers
at Ebbsfleet. That whole area will be in the
middle of a town in about ten years' time.


Isn't it Green Belt?

Errr... if it was, it isn't any more (so I'm guessing it wasn't!).
Planning permission was granted last year for a 3,000 home + ~800,000m²
commerical development called (at the moment) Kent Thameside. Part of
the Prescott grand vision for the Thames Gateway I think.

http://www.kt-s.co.uk

Thankfully a generally-segregated bus system is planned for the area,
with a network of buses running initially between Dartford, Bluewater,
Greenhithe, Northfleet and Gravesend, with other legs added gradually
afterwards (they expect to serve the international station by the time
it opens). They mention a both local and express routes between
Ebbsfleet and Gravesend.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London