| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7829676.stm
Well, there you go. I have to say I was unsure about whether the government would opt for it bit it seems they have. To make good use of the vernacular, there is going to be a total and utter **** storm about this. It's going to prompt massive and wide scale protests from a whole cross-section of people. I'm not quite sure how the Tories pledge of no third runway fits in with this - if the Tories are elected in 2010 will they scrap work on it? One can only presume that nothing will have actually happened on the ground by then. The BBC article has this to say on the time scale of proceedings: ---quote--- Asked about the decision on Wednesday, Prime Minister Gordon Brown declined to guarantee MPs a vote on the issue. Should the government give the go-ahead, he said there would be a debate in Parliament and that the scheme would have to be granted planning permission. This is likely to be a lengthy process, with work on a new runway unlike to be completed before 2019 ---/quote--- Also, with regards to the whole issue of high-speed rail links and Heathrow Hubs and the like, the BBC piece only says this: ---quote--- Alongside the commitment to a new runway, Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon is expected to announce increased investment in public transport, including a new high-speed rail link from the airport to central London. ---/quote--- I suspect that's not what is really meant - or is it? Surely the Big Idea is to link in Heathrow to a new north-south high-speed line - but it's far from clear whether the current government might actually subscribe to this Big Idea, even as part of a package along with making Heathrow the transport hub of the known Universe. |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:51:21 -0800 (PST) someone who may be Mizter T
wrote this:- ---quote--- Alongside the commitment to a new runway, Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon is expected to announce increased investment in public transport, including a new high-speed rail link from the airport to central London. ---/quote--- I suspect that's not what is really meant - or is it? I'll wait for the announcement. However, they faced two choices: 1) the same old stuff which has got this in the current mess. Expand Heathrow and provide some fig leaves for the embarrassed to hide behind. 2) put their claimed policies on climate change, equatability, the economy and jobs into action. Get rid of most of the short distance flights by transferring the trips onto trains, leaving plenty of space for long distance flights. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
In message
, at 17:51:21 on Wed, 14 Jan 2009, Mizter T remarked: ---quote--- Alongside the commitment to a new runway, Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon is expected to announce increased investment in public transport, including a new high-speed rail link from the airport to central London. ---/quote--- I suspect that's not what is really meant - or is it? They seem to be talking about a new line from Heathrow to St Pancras. The original HEx plans had a second terminus at St Pancras, via a route through north London - this new one might be a tunnel. Is it too late to divert Crossrail slightly, and have one of its stations at St Pancras? Or maybe a very long travelator from Farringdon :) -- Roland Perry |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 17:51:21 on Wed, 14 Jan 2009, Mizter T remarked: ---quote--- Alongside the commitment to a new runway, Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon is expected to announce increased investment in public transport, including a new high-speed rail link from the airport to central London. ---/quote--- I suspect that's not what is really meant - or is it? They seem to be talking about a new line from Heathrow to St Pancras. The original HEx plans had a second terminus at St Pancras, via a route through north London - this new one might be a tunnel. Is it too late to divert Crossrail slightly, and have one of its stations at St Pancras? Or maybe a very long travelator from Farringdon :) Crossrail is not an 'express' service. Its services are all stations stoppers from the airport, which is why it takes over Connect, not HEx. Unless it is to have overtaking loops of course... Looking at the supposed hub proposals, I suspect the existing HEx will be almost as fast to the existing terminals 123 (East) and 5, as it won't include a change at the 'Hub'. Given the tunnel from St Pancras to Stratford, and as far as the surface at Dagenham, is speed limited, the latest proposals also probably won't necessarily provide HSL speeds as far as Heathrow anyway? Paul |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On Jan 15, 1:51*am, Mizter T wrote:
of the vernacular, there is going to be a total and utter **** storm about this. It's going to prompt massive and wide scale protests from Especially given that passenger numbers at heathrow are dropping according to this report. The whole thing stinks. Wouldn't surprise me if the whole thing is just an excuse for the government to create another show project to pretend their in touch with business. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...4/baa-heathrow B2003 |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
In message , at 09:21:53 on
Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Paul Scott remarked: Given the tunnel from St Pancras to Stratford, and as far as the surface at Dagenham, is speed limited, the latest proposals also probably won't necessarily provide HSL speeds as far as Heathrow anyway? I'd be very surprised if plans for a HSL from Heathrow to St Pancras were in any way inhibited from describing a similarly speed restricted tunnel as "High Speed". It's all spin, anyway. Like the so-called High Speed line from Brussels to Amsterdam, which will use the existing tracks (no faster than 15 minute transit time) from [a little before] Schiphol into the city centre. -- Roland Perry |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
In message
, at 01:35:13 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, remarked: Especially given that passenger numbers at heathrow are dropping according to this report. The whole thing stinks. We are in a "bust", so of course short-term passenger numbers are likely to fall. The new runway is (one possible) solution for the capacity required in the next "boom". If there's not going to be another "boom", we don't need a lot of things, including Crossrail. -- Roland Perry |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On Jan 15, 1:51*am, Mizter T wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7829676.stm Well, there you go. I have to say I was unsure about whether the government would opt for it bit it seems they have. To make good use of the vernacular, there is going to be a total and utter **** storm about this. It's going to prompt massive and wide scale protests from a whole cross-section of people. I'm not quite sure how the Tories pledge of no third runway fits in with this - if the Tories are elected in 2010 will they scrap work on it? One can only presume that nothing will have actually happened on the ground by then. The Tories can't decide whether they object to an expansion of airport capacity on principle, or whether, as Boris says, it's just Heathrow that is unsuitable. Rather like Labour didn't reverse rail privatisation when they came to power, I suspect the Tories wouldn't reverse any decision on Heathrow. Anyway, let's wait for the official announcement. |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On Jan 15, 10:08*am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 01:35:13 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, remarked: Especially given that passenger numbers at heathrow are dropping according to this report. The whole thing stinks. We are in a "bust", so of course short-term passenger numbers are likely to fall. The new runway is (one possible) solution for the capacity required in the next "boom". If there's not going to be another "boom", we don't need a lot of things, including Crossrail. When you're in a bust you don't start spending billions on vanity projects. Even in the boom years heathrow could cope with the passenger numbers so why build a new runway now when they're dropping?? Its like saying "oh , theres less traffic on the roads - lets build some bypasses!" B2003 |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
|
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
"Paul Scott" wrote in message ... "Roland Perry" wrote They seem to be talking about a new line from Heathrow to St Pancras. The original HEx plans had a second terminus at St Pancras, via a route through north London - this new one might be a tunnel. Is it too late to divert Crossrail slightly, and have one of its stations at St Pancras? Or maybe a very long travelator from Farringdon :) Crossrail is not an 'express' service. Its services are all stations stoppers from the airport, which is why it takes over Connect, not HEx. Unless it is to have overtaking loops of course... I'll wait to see the actual proposals before I comment on them. However, a previous thread suggested that HEx would be likely to lose to Crossrail passengers who now transfer from HEx to LUL at Paddington, plus others who transfer to taxis, but will now do so at another Crossrail station. So there might be a case for diverting HEx (in tunnel, not wandering all round Cricklewood) to St Pancras. Passengers who needd to travel between heathrow and Paddington will still be able to use Crossrail. Peter |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
In message , at 10:48:31 on
Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Peter Masson remarked: So there might be a case for diverting HEx (in tunnel, not wandering all round Cricklewood) to St Pancras. Would this be a new station at St Pancras, or maybe sharing the Kent domestic platforms, which might be over-specified. On the other hand, if Thameslink2012 does in fact include through-running from the GN services on the ECML, there will greater spare capacity at KX. -- Roland Perry |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 10:48:31 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Peter Masson remarked: So there might be a case for diverting HEx (in tunnel, not wandering all round Cricklewood) to St Pancras. Would this be a new station at St Pancras, or maybe sharing the Kent domestic platforms, which might be over-specified. On the other hand, if Thameslink2012 does in fact include through-running from the GN services on the ECML, there will greater spare capacity at KX. I envisage an underground terminus, possibly double ended, with one entrance from the concourse at St Pancras (near the access to the Thameslink platforms, and another with an entrance from Euston (may need a travelator). Peter |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
In message , at 11:00:51 on
Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Peter Masson remarked: So there might be a case for diverting HEx (in tunnel, not wandering all round Cricklewood) to St Pancras. Would this be a new station at St Pancras, or maybe sharing the Kent domestic platforms, which might be over-specified. On the other hand, if Thameslink2012 does in fact include through-running from the GN services on the ECML, there will greater spare capacity at KX. I envisage an underground terminus, possibly double ended, with one entrance from the concourse at St Pancras (near the access to the Thameslink platforms, and another with an entrance from Euston (may need a travelator). What would it be "underneath", there's a lot of existing stuff under StP and KX, and I'm not sure you'd be able to locate anything under the British Library. -- Roland Perry |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 01:35:13 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, remarked: Especially given that passenger numbers at heathrow are dropping according to this report. The whole thing stinks. We are in a "bust", so of course short-term passenger numbers are likely to fall. The new runway is (one possible) solution for the capacity required in the next "boom". If there's not going to be another "boom", we don't need a lot of things, including Crossrail. But it is quite possible that by the time the next boom comes along, the attitude to companies for international travel has changed. It is business travellers that "demand" the benefits of a Heathrow hub. I would suggest that tourist travellers would much prefer point to point from their local airport, even if the cost of that is "one flight per week". tim |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On Jan 15, 10:40*am, Roland Perry wrote:
When you're in a bust you don't start spending billions on vanity projects. So you'd recommend suspending Crossrail until we are well into the next boom (and suffering from the fact it doesn't exist yet)? Crossrail is required because even now the tube is an essential service (the majority of its passengers are not off on holiday) that is hopelessly overloaded. Heathrow is far from being essential and isn't overloaded anyway. As you say , its merely "predicted" to be so based on some finger in the air guesitmates which are now all null and void anyway. so why build a new runway now when they're dropping?? because it's predicted to rise, later. And we all now how accurate predictions are. Anyone who can predict what will happen to the world economy in the next decade is either deluded or a liar. Of course, there might be other solutions, such as closing Heathrow and running 4tph Eurostar to CDG - but have you modelled the consequences for the UK economy? Wtf are you talking about? The amount of economic activiy provided to the economy by air travel is minimal. Most goods come and go by ship and most trading is done electronically. Even most business can be done using phone or email. Also economic growth (when it returns) is unsustainable anyway. At some point it has to stop and building more and more runways isn't the answer - what happens in 20 years if the new one is overloaded? Build another on top of hounslow? And another on top of staines when thats saturated too? Its like saying "oh , theres less traffic on the roads - lets build some bypasses!" The road building programme (such as it is) hasn't been suspended because of the bust. You're not good with analogies are you. B2003 |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
wrote in message ... On Jan 15, 10:08 am, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 01:35:13 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, remarked: Especially given that passenger numbers at heathrow are dropping according to this report. The whole thing stinks. We are in a "bust", so of course short-term passenger numbers are likely to fall. The new runway is (one possible) solution for the capacity required in the next "boom". If there's not going to be another "boom", we don't need a lot of things, including Crossrail. When you're in a bust you don't start spending billions on vanity projects. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The one (and only) good thing about this decision, is that it isn't a decision to spend their (aka our) money, but to allow a PLC to spend its money. If there is no business case for the plan, the banks wont lend BAA the funds. tim |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On Jan 15, 11:46*am, "tim....." wrote:
If there is no business case for the plan, the banks wont lend BAA the funds. Given who caused the current crisis I think its fair to say that banks are the last places you'd go to get an accurate prediction of the future! :o) B2003 |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
|
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
EE507 wrote:
The Tories can't decide whether they object to an expansion of airport capacity on principle, or whether, as Boris says, it's just Heathrow that is unsuitable. Rather like Labour didn't reverse rail privatisation when they came to power, I suspect the Tories wouldn't reverse any decision on Heathrow. Anyway, let's wait for the official announcement. The Tories have already stated, unequivocally, that they will cancel any planned third runway at Heathrow when (if) they get into power. Boris Toffson's Thames Estuary Airport plan is something of an embarrassment for the Tory party. He is shaping up to be as much of a thorn in the Tories' side as Ken Livingstone was in his party's. |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
|
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
"Tony Polson" wrote in message
Boris Toffson's Thames Estuary Airport plan is something of an embarrassment for the Tory party. He is shaping up to be as much of a thorn in the Tories' side as Ken Livingstone was in his party's. With one key difference: Ken never had ambitions beyond London politics, but Boris does. This makes him a rival for whoever is leading the Tory party, whereas Ken never had any leadership ambitions outside London. But it might also make him more careful (ie, he probably won't do the rightwing equivalent of Chavez type deals). |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On Jan 15, 12:18*pm, Tony Polson wrote:
EE507 wrote: The Tories can't decide whether they object to an expansion of airport capacity on principle, or whether, as Boris says, it's just Heathrow that is unsuitable. Rather like Labour didn't reverse rail privatisation when they came to power, I suspect the Tories wouldn't reverse any decision on Heathrow. Anyway, let's wait for the official announcement. The Tories have already stated, unequivocally, that they will cancel any planned third runway at Heathrow when (if) they get into power. What political parties say in opposition does not in any way reflect what they do in power. I fully expect the Tories' green gloss to start flaking as soon as they win the election, and to be a mere memory within three years. |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
Peter Masson wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 10:48:31 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Peter Masson remarked: So there might be a case for diverting HEx (in tunnel, not wandering all round Cricklewood) to St Pancras. Would this be a new station at St Pancras, or maybe sharing the Kent domestic platforms, which might be over-specified. On the other hand, if Thameslink2012 does in fact include through-running from the GN services on the ECML, there will greater spare capacity at KX. I envisage an underground terminus, possibly double ended, with one entrance from the concourse at St Pancras (near the access to the Thameslink platforms, and another with an entrance from Euston (may need a travelator). It makes more sense to extend the Kent domestics from St P to Heathrow, with a reversal at St P. |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On Jan 15, 12:07*pm, Huge wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 04:05:11 -0800, boltar2003 wrote: On Jan 15, 11:46*am, "tim....." wrote: If there is no business case for the plan, the banks wont lend BAA the funds. Given who caused the current crisis And who do think that is? The answer was in the rest of the sentence you snipped. The braincell done a bunk again has it? B2003 |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
"EE507" wrote in message
On Jan 15, 12:18 pm, Tony Polson wrote: EE507 wrote: The Tories can't decide whether they object to an expansion of airport capacity on principle, or whether, as Boris says, it's just Heathrow that is unsuitable. Rather like Labour didn't reverse rail privatisation when they came to power, I suspect the Tories wouldn't reverse any decision on Heathrow. Anyway, let's wait for the official announcement. The Tories have already stated, unequivocally, that they will cancel any planned third runway at Heathrow when (if) they get into power. What political parties say in opposition does not in any way reflect what they do in power. I fully expect the Tories' green gloss to start flaking as soon as they win the election, and to be a mere memory within three years. Actually, it's fading already, reflecting the change in voters' concerns (from ecology to the economy). |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
"John Rowland" wrote in
message Peter Masson wrote: "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 10:48:31 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Peter Masson remarked: So there might be a case for diverting HEx (in tunnel, not wandering all round Cricklewood) to St Pancras. Would this be a new station at St Pancras, or maybe sharing the Kent domestic platforms, which might be over-specified. On the other hand, if Thameslink2012 does in fact include through-running from the GN services on the ECML, there will greater spare capacity at KX. I envisage an underground terminus, possibly double ended, with one entrance from the concourse at St Pancras (near the access to the Thameslink platforms, and another with an entrance from Euston (may need a travelator). It makes more sense to extend the Kent domestics from St P to Heathrow, with a reversal at St P. But as I understand it, Heathrow Hub is just the first station on HS2, en-route to the midlands or the west, not a terminus. I doubt that the current St P has enough domestic platforms (on either side) to be the London Terminus for the high speed link to the north. Also, are they long enough? |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
|
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On Jan 15, 1:52*pm, "John Rowland"
wrote: On the contrary: building things requires labour, which can be got more cheaply in a bust, Not if some of the cheap labour does a runner to another country. I have no figures at hand but I wouldn't be surprised if theres a slow leakage of poles and other east europeans from the UK right now especially given the current exchange rate of the pound. B2003 |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On 15 Jan, 14:07, wrote: On Jan 15, 1:52*pm, "John Rowland" wrote: On the contrary: building things requires labour, which can be got more cheaply in a bust, Not if some of the cheap labour does a runner to another country. I have no figures at hand but I wouldn't be surprised if theres a slow leakage of poles and other east europeans from the UK right now especially given the current exchange rate of the pound. No leakages with Poles, they're great plumbers. Being serious - yes, many Poles have been heading back to Poland which at least until recently was beginning to boom, not quite sure how they're holding up at the moment. It's not so much exchange rates, though that's a factor, more about jobs - there were lots of jobs coming on stream in Poland, and fewer in the UK. Of course now in the UK jobs are rapidly becoming scarcer. (I think the trend is - or at least was - mirrored with other eastern Europeans, though in a rather less pronounced way than with Poles and Poland.) |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On 15 Jan, 12:18, Tony Polson wrote: EE507 wrote: The Tories can't decide whether they object to an expansion of airport capacity on principle, or whether, as Boris says, it's just Heathrow that is unsuitable. Rather like Labour didn't reverse rail privatisation when they came to power, I suspect the Tories wouldn't reverse any decision on Heathrow. Anyway, let's wait for the official announcement. The Tories have already stated, unequivocally, that they will cancel any planned third runway at Heathrow when (if) they get into power. Boris Toffson's Thames Estuary Airport plan is something of an embarrassment for the Tory party. *He is shaping up to be as much of a thorn in the Tories' side as Ken Livingstone was in his party's. I disagree with the simple picture you paint in your final comment. I think the truth is somewhat more complex - Boris is neither a puppet of the Conservative Central Office and leadership, but nor is he anything quite like the renegade that Ken was (or at least was capable of being). Recliner's point (in his separate reply to your post) about him having ambitions beyond London should also be borne in mind. |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
On 15 Jan, 13:29, "Recliner" wrote: "Tony Polson" wrote: Boris Toffson's Thames Estuary Airport plan is something of an embarrassment for the Tory party. *He is shaping up to be as much of a thorn in the Tories' side as Ken Livingstone was in his party's. With one key difference: Ken never had ambitions beyond London politics, but Boris does. This makes him a rival for whoever is leading the Tory party, whereas Ken never had any leadership ambitions outside London. But it might also make him more careful (ie, he probably won't do the rightwing equivalent of Chavez type deals). You'll note in my separate reply to Tony's post that I don't quite agree with his simplistic analysis of Boris, but anyway regarding your points... I think Ken did once have ambitions beyond London, but they had gone by the time he was elected Mayor in 2000. Your point about Boris and his ambitions is true in my mind. I think that at least some of his actions in London need to be viewed through the national lens before they can be fully comprehended, as for at least some of the time he is playing over the heads of the Londoners in the stalls to the national audience in the grand circle (and occasionally throwing a line or two in the direction of the opulent box dwellers). |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
In message , at 13:51:50 on
Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Recliner remarked: I doubt that the current St P has enough domestic platforms (on either side) to be the London Terminus for the high speed link to the north. Also, are they long enough? Not enough of them, and they are approx 10 carriages long - is that sufficient? -- Roland Perry |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
In message , at 13:13:33 on Thu, 15
Jan 2009, Stuart remarked: When you're in a bust you don't start spending billions on vanity projects. Even in the boom years heathrow could cope with the passenger numbers so why build a new runway now when they're dropping?? Its like saying "oh , theres less traffic on the roads - lets build some bypasses!" Surely it's the best time to build public infrastructure? Building companies are desperate for work and labour is plentiful, things can be built cheaper and will be ready for when the demand picks And Hoon has just announced more road building, exactly to this economic model. -- Roland Perry |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
In message , at 11:42:26 on Thu, 15
Jan 2009, tim..... remarked: Especially given that passenger numbers at heathrow are dropping according to this report. The whole thing stinks. We are in a "bust", so of course short-term passenger numbers are likely to fall. The new runway is (one possible) solution for the capacity required in the next "boom". If there's not going to be another "boom", we don't need a lot of things, including Crossrail. But it is quite possible that by the time the next boom comes along, the attitude to companies for international travel has changed. I've seen no discernible change in the 25 years I've been flying "on business", apart from a few glitches caused by terrorist incidents and nervous Americans, not cashflow. It is business travellers that "demand" the benefits of a Heathrow hub. I would suggest that tourist travellers would much prefer point to point from their local airport, even if the cost of that is "one flight per week". That's where much of the expansion is coming from, and I agree that people should not expect the tourist sector to be a growth generator at Heathrow. But Heathrow has spurned charter flights for a generation, and has very few "low cost" airlines operating from there. -- Roland Perry |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
|
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
"Mizter T" wrote
I think Ken did once have ambitions beyond London, but they had gone by the time he was elected Mayor in 2000. Exactly right. After Mrs Thatcher scrapped the GLC, Ken stated that only the house of Commons could really achieve anything; however, after a couple of years as a back bench MP, isolated even within Kinnock's Old Labour, he soon realised that there was no 'guaranteed' way of achieving his ends, then he turned his attention back to more local aims. Boris is 'old tory' just as much as Ken is 'old labour'; he is loyal to those who voted for him, and has his own agenda. I suspect his differences with the National Tories are smaller than a few news stories might suggest, and when/if Lord Snooty gets elected, he'll work much more closely with them. At the moment, he has power, they don't - and he's not going to waste opportunities, simply to please Her Majesty's Official Opposition. However much of a Tory Boris is, he ain't stupid, and he recognises that London needs those awful socialist ideas like public transport. One reason why Lord Snooty has to keep saying that many of Boris' plans are 'local issues' up for local decisions (eg anything remotely connected to congestion charging). London will always be a 'special case', and it's no surprise that Boris' policies differ from Ken's only in superficial ways. So far, at least. Boris' re-election manifesto will be a joy to behold ;o) -- Andrew Interviewer: Tonight I'm interviewing that famous nurse, Florence Nightingale Tommy Cooper (dressed as a nurse): Sir Florence Nightingale Interviewer: *Sir* Florence Nightingale? Tommy Cooper: I'm a Night Nurse Campaign For The Real Tommy Cooper |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 11:00:51 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Peter Masson remarked: I envisage an underground terminus, possibly double ended, with one entrance from the concourse at St Pancras (near the access to the Thameslink platforms, and another with an entrance from Euston (may need a travelator). What would it be "underneath", there's a lot of existing stuff under StP and KX, and I'm not sure you'd be able to locate anything under the British Library. Put it under Phoenix Road/Brill place, behind the British Library, so at right angles to the Thameslink platforms. The suggestion of reversing the Kent domestics at St P, and extending them to Heathrow, has some attractions, but the rolling stock you need is not really compatible (Kent domestics a lot of seats for commuters; HEx plenty of luggage space, and a high quality first class section. Also, the St Pancras throat is now very congested with tracks going in all directions, and I'm not sure how an exit that has to turn west will work. I really can't see how a HSL from St Pancras, or more likely Euston as that's the only obvious space for the terminus, via Heathrow, will work. It would have to be in tunnel at least pretty well all the way to Heathrow, and with a stop there is only going to be marginally quicker to the West Midlands than going at 125 mph down the WCML. The Greengauge proposals (head out of London via Northolt Junction, and follow the general alignment of the Chiltern Line/M40, serving Heathrow with a branch, joining the main HSL in the vicinity of Denham) seem to me to be more rational. Peter |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
"Mizter T" wrote in message
On 15 Jan, 13:29, "Recliner" wrote: "Tony Polson" wrote: Boris Toffson's Thames Estuary Airport plan is something of an embarrassment for the Tory party. He is shaping up to be as much of a thorn in the Tories' side as Ken Livingstone was in his party's. With one key difference: Ken never had ambitions beyond London politics, but Boris does. This makes him a rival for whoever is leading the Tory party, whereas Ken never had any leadership ambitions outside London. But it might also make him more careful (ie, he probably won't do the rightwing equivalent of Chavez type deals). You'll note in my separate reply to Tony's post that I don't quite agree with his simplistic analysis of Boris, but anyway regarding your points... I think Ken did once have ambitions beyond London, but they had gone by the time he was elected Mayor in 2000. Obviously it's hard to say for sure, but I don't think Ken ever showed much interest in anything other than ruling London. He executed a coup to get the top GLC job, and hung on to it tenaciously thereafter. He only became an MP when he was forcibly evicted from the GLC by Maggie, and then didn't do any of things he'd need to do to start climbing the ministerial ladder. As soon as there was the chance to become mayor of London, he leapt at it, making very clear that he was going to stand and do his damnedest to win, regardless of what the Labour party thought or did to him. All very different to Boris, who'd never shown much previous interest in London politics, and who had to be persuaded to stand. And only well into the campaign did he show much interest in winning. Your point about Boris and his ambitions is true in my mind. I think that at least some of his actions in London need to be viewed through the national lens before they can be fully comprehended, as for at least some of the time he is playing over the heads of the Londoners in the stalls to the national audience in the grand circle (and occasionally throwing a line or two in the direction of the opulent box dwellers). Agreed. he's also made clear that he has no intention of doing the mayor's job for more than eight years, and as he's too young to retire in seven years time, one has to assume he has other ambitions (beyond some lucrative non-execs). |
Heathrow third runway to get the go ahead
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
In message , at 13:51:50 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Recliner remarked: I doubt that the current St P has enough domestic platforms (on either side) to be the London Terminus for the high speed link to the north. Also, are they long enough? Not enough of them, and they are approx 10 carriages long - is that sufficient? I would have thought new high speed trains would be longer than that (even the Pendos will soon be 11 cars long). |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:41 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk