On 7 May, 10:28, "Tim Fenton" wrote:
"Recliner" wrote in message

...

My feeling is that Dave and his jolly good chums are set to visit on
us the same horrors that Thatcher did, having learned nothing from
the post 1979 record. They won't be the ones that have to go without.

They enjoyed 18 years of power after 1979, so maybe their post-179 record
wasn't so unpopular after all.

So a decade of three million plus unemployed is OK, then?

What the Tories did manage was to demonstrate that, with the UK's electoral
system, you can get a landslide victory with only 30% of the electorate
making a positive choice for your party. This was also discovered by Labour,
whose positive choice percentage in 2005 was even less.

I believe that unemployment has never since gone as low as it was at
the time when the Tories produced their "Labour isn't Working" poster.

wrote:
On Thu, 7 May 2009 02:59:21 -0700 (PDT)
wrote:
John Major's Tory government was accused of sleaze and incompetence but
nothing they did bears more than the slightest resemblance to the
institutionalised gross corruption and negligence of this NuLabour lot.

No, *everything* they did is *almost exactly identical*.

Not really. The tories were more into personal sleeze, with labour its
more political sleeze. And TBH even in the worst excesses of the Major
goverment no politicians career would survive 2 forced resignations from
government. Even Archer didn't manage that. Yet theres mandelson , still
with his finger on the pulse.


Exactly.

Not to mention Blunkett ...

On 7 May, 11:11, wrote:
On Thu, 7 May 2009 02:59:21 -0700 (PDT)

wrote:
John Major's Tory government was accused of sleaze and incompetence but
nothing they did bears more than the slightest resemblance to the
institutionalised gross corruption and negligence of this NuLabour lot.

No, *everything* they did is *almost exactly identical*.

Not really. The tories were more into personal sleeze, with labour its
more political sleeze. And TBH even in the worst excesses of the Major
goverment no politicians career would survive 2 forced resignations from
government. Even Archer didn't manage that. Yet theres mandelson , still
with his finger on the pulse.

"Fangs in the ankle" is more the phrase that comes to my mind.

wrote in message
...
On May 7, 9:05 am, "DW downunder" noname wrote:
4. NO-ONE has mentioned the plethora of hybrid battery-equipped
rollingstock
currently prototyped, on trial, in low volume production etc around the
world. Given Crossrail's gestation, can I assert with some confidence that
by then it will be quite normal for trains to extend a moderate distance
beyond the wires or juice rail. 25kV to Reading would not necessarily be a
pre-requisite to CrossRail service by the mid-10s.

No, you can't.

Batteries are a crap way of storing energy. Making batteries not be a
crap way of storing energy has been a major preoccupation among
engineers and physicists and - even more importantly - the people who
fund them for decades. They've made batteries be a slightly less crap
way of storing energy. They haven't made them not be a crap way of
storing energy. None of the current trials do anything to reverse
that.

At absolute best, a battery train might just about be a solution for
Henley. It would be an insane solution for 6ish tph on the GWML.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

Thank you, gentlemen - and your sources?

Perhaps a little more depth would help me understand - as I understand you,
with supercapacitors, emerging lithium technologies and our old faithful
lead-acid gel we haven't yet got a package of technologies that can be tuned
to the precise characteristics of suburban/interurban rail - and can't
expect one by the time Crossrail is commissioned? Is it the vibrating
environment, the heating and cooling cycles, the economics of battery life
and charging cycles, or the energy storage per unit mass that is/are the
"fatal" issues from your data sources? Crossrail is at best 5 years out.
Hybrid motor car products are moving into the mainstream, 3rd generation
Prius, local manufacture of larger Hybrids by Toyota outside Japan (hybrid
Camry to be made in Australia, release 2010, for example), more
manufacturers in the market, Obama forcing GM and Chrysler down the hybrid,
ecodiesel, light and green road, etc. With all this putting volume into the
automotive propulsion battery market, you're convinced price and performance
won't trend towards technical and economic viability for transit and urban
rail traction applications?

OK

David down under

On 6 May, 17:49, Mizter T wrote:
Except that (if I've got this right) in the evening peak you can use
off-peak tickets on the slower Turbo services but not on the HSTs, at
least for journeys leaving London - though to outsiders this
information is rather hard to come by.

Posters are up & visible at Paddington.....
And that is unlikely to change under Crossrail - just that they'll
need to change trains at Maidenhead / Reading.to get to Oxford in the
evening peak.

On 6 May, 18:01, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Chris" wrote
It won't be cross-platform - fast London's will leave from current
platforms 8 & 9, the slows / crossrail would be from the 3 extra
platforms (behind current Plat 9 and a further island platform to the
north of that.

AIUI existing 5 & 8 will be the Down Main platforms, 9 and a new face
opposite it will be theUp Main platforms, and the Relief/Crossrail platforms
will be two new islands beyond that.

You are correct - I got my current platform numbers in a mess!

On 6 May, 18:39, Roland Perry wrote:
I thought the residents in the vicinity of Maidenhead were opposed to
the ugly looking OHL? Or have they come to terms with it now.

Do they have any choice? Permitted development on the railways means
that they don't need planning permissions....

On 6 May, 20:22, GazK wrote:
Oh yeah? Do you know just how large these two projects are? Not a hope
in hell.....

Sorry to contradict, but they are being developed by a single NR team,
with a single manager at the helm. I know this to be true because he
gave a presentation last week, at which I was present.

Thanks for this update.

On 7 May, 09:05, "DW downunder" noname wrote:
4. NO-ONE has mentioned the plethora of hybrid battery-equipped rollingstock
currently prototyped, on trial, in low volume production etc around the
world. Given Crossrail's gestation, can I assert with some confidence that
by then it will be quite normal for trains to extend a moderate distance
beyond the wires or juice rail. 25kV to Reading would not necessarily be a
pre-requisite to CrossRail service by the mid-10s.


As a mechanism purely for getting ECS Crossrail stockl to / from the
Rwading Depot & Maidenhead - yes, I guess this would be a possibility.

5. Also absent from discussion so far has been AirTrack. In some other
forums, we hear that BAA are firmly behind AirTrack. AIUI, provision has
been made in the Heathrow 5 station box for them.

Correct.

The discussion suggests
that HConn/Crossrail will run through to Reading via H5 and AirTrack.

Hmmm - brains trying to do overtime again?.....not a chance! Why on
earth would the DfT want to spend a lot extra on dual-voltage systems
to enable Crossrail to run on the third-rail system? Secondly,
AirTrack will be a BAA service, just like HEx - so BAA will purchase &
run their own trains for their services....not state-owned Crossrail
trains.

Those
with local route knowledge can fill me in here, but once the link is made,
basically would dual-voltage stock (one assumes Bombardier will have
recovered from their supply line and quality management difficulties by
then - ) provide a through Crossrail all-electric service?

Getting the Crossrail stock from the new Platform at REading back to
it's depot will also be somewhat of a challenge, as there is no
connector in the plans from the Airtrack line into Reading with high-
nuumbered Reading platforms, and thus a route to the depot. It's self-
contained. There is also an AirTrack depot shown in those plans, but I
can't remember where it was to be located....

The enhancements of the track at Reading as part of
the £425 million station redevelopment would also pave the way for Airtrack
trains to use the station. Network Rail is also working with the Department
for Transport and British Airports Association (BAA) on the scheme to
connect passengers directly to Terminal 5.

Yup - that's the new platform on the south-east side of Reading
together with the BAA-owned route into the airport.
\Nothing to back up the Crossrail stock being used there.

6. Given the time frames for Crossrail, and the rather modest scope of
AirTrack in comparison, could it be that AirTrack is up, and through
electric services running Paddington - Reading before Crossrail starts?

Quite likely - another reason that it won't be using Crossrail stock.
It won't be built in time....

7. While HConn only goes to H123 (old H Central, made more sense!), AIUI
that's a commercial decision. The AirTrack scheme clearly envisages
HConn/Crossrail coming into the H5 box and extending west out of it.

Proof please - just where does it state or heavily hint this is the
case? I understood they will be using separate platforms at T5, with
no connections.

What
happens to HEx and links to H123 then would be influenced by the commercial
imperitives of the day.

Possibly - but currently BAA have a long contract with the DfT, and by
extension, NR, to run HEx services to HCen & T5.
Something BAA won't give up unless *they* want to do so.

"DW downunder" noname wrote in message
...

5. Also absent from discussion so far has been AirTrack. In some other
forums, we hear that BAA are firmly behind AirTrack. AIUI, provision has
been made in the Heathrow 5 station box for them. The discussion suggests
that HConn/Crossrail will run through to Reading via H5 and AirTrack.
Those with local route knowledge can fill me in here, but once the link is
made, basically would dual-voltage stock (one assumes Bombardier will have
recovered from their supply line and quality management difficulties by
then - ) provide a through Crossrail all-electric service?


7. While HConn only goes to H123 (old H Central, made more sense!), AIUI
that's a commercial decision. The AirTrack scheme clearly envisages
HConn/Crossrail coming into the H5 box and extending west out of it. What
happens to HEx and links to H123 then would be influenced by the
commercial imperitives of the day.


The latest Airtrack plan (linked below - consultation closed) differs from
your understanding:

http://www.baa.com/assets/Internet/H...sultation2.pdf

It is Heathrow Express they propose extending to run to a new bay platform
at Staines via T5, and the Airtrack trains will run from
Reading/Guildford/Waterloo to T5 only AFAICT.

All indications are that Heathrow Connect (tbrb Crossrail) will continue to
run to T4...

Paul S

"Chris" wrote in message
...
On 6 May, 17:49, Mizter T wrote:
Except that (if I've got this right) in the evening peak you can use
off-peak tickets on the slower Turbo services but not on the HSTs, at
least for journeys leaving London - though to outsiders this
information is rather hard to come by.

Posters are up & visible at Paddington.....
And that is unlikely to change under Crossrail - just that they'll
need to change trains at Maidenhead / Reading.to get to Oxford in the
evening peak.

On 6 May, 18:01, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Chris" wrote
It won't be cross-platform - fast London's will leave from current
platforms 8 & 9, the slows / crossrail would be from the 3 extra
platforms (behind current Plat 9 and a further island platform to the
north of that.

AIUI existing 5 & 8 will be the Down Main platforms, 9 and a new face
opposite it will be theUp Main platforms, and the Relief/Crossrail
platforms
will be two new islands beyond that.

You are correct - I got my current platform numbers in a mess!

On 6 May, 18:39, Roland Perry wrote:
I thought the residents in the vicinity of Maidenhead were opposed to
the ugly looking OHL? Or have they come to terms with it now.

Do they have any choice? Permitted development on the railways means
that they don't need planning permissions....

On 6 May, 20:22, GazK wrote:
Oh yeah? Do you know just how large these two projects are? Not a hope
in hell.....

Sorry to contradict, but they are being developed by a single NR team,
with a single manager at the helm. I know this to be true because he
gave a presentation last week, at which I was present.

Thanks for this update.

On 7 May, 09:05, "DW downunder" noname wrote:
4. NO-ONE has mentioned the plethora of hybrid battery-equipped
rollingstock
currently prototyped, on trial, in low volume production etc around the
world. Given Crossrail's gestation, can I assert with some confidence that
by then it will be quite normal for trains to extend a moderate distance
beyond the wires or juice rail. 25kV to Reading would not necessarily be a
pre-requisite to CrossRail service by the mid-10s.


As a mechanism purely for getting ECS Crossrail stockl to / from the
Rwading Depot & Maidenhead - yes, I guess this would be a possibility.

5. Also absent from discussion so far has been AirTrack. In some other
forums, we hear that BAA are firmly behind AirTrack. AIUI, provision has
been made in the Heathrow 5 station box for them.

Correct.

The discussion suggests
that HConn/Crossrail will run through to Reading via H5 and AirTrack.

Hmmm - brains trying to do overtime again?.....not a chance! Why on
earth would the DfT want to spend a lot extra on dual-voltage systems
to enable Crossrail to run on the third-rail system? Secondly,
AirTrack will be a BAA service, just like HEx - so BAA will purchase &
run their own trains for their services....not state-owned Crossrail
trains.

Those
with local route knowledge can fill me in here, but once the link is made,
basically would dual-voltage stock (one assumes Bombardier will have
recovered from their supply line and quality management difficulties by
then - ) provide a through Crossrail all-electric service?

Getting the Crossrail stock from the new Platform at REading back to
it's depot will also be somewhat of a challenge, as there is no
connector in the plans from the Airtrack line into Reading with high-
nuumbered Reading platforms, and thus a route to the depot. It's self-
contained. There is also an AirTrack depot shown in those plans, but I
can't remember where it was to be located....

The enhancements of the track at Reading as part of
the £425 million station redevelopment would also pave the way for
Airtrack
trains to use the station. Network Rail is also working with the
Department
for Transport and British Airports Association (BAA) on the scheme to
connect passengers directly to Terminal 5.

Yup - that's the new platform on the south-east side of Reading
together with the BAA-owned route into the airport.
\Nothing to back up the Crossrail stock being used there.

6. Given the time frames for Crossrail, and the rather modest scope of
AirTrack in comparison, could it be that AirTrack is up, and through
electric services running Paddington - Reading before Crossrail starts?

Quite likely - another reason that it won't be using Crossrail stock.
It won't be built in time....

7. While HConn only goes to H123 (old H Central, made more sense!), AIUI
that's a commercial decision. The AirTrack scheme clearly envisages
HConn/Crossrail coming into the H5 box and extending west out of it.

Proof please - just where does it state or heavily hint this is the
case? I understood they will be using separate platforms at T5, with
no connections.

Some of the comments from online dox:
A.
http://www.heathrowairport.com/asset...w_Brochure.pdf
1) "Other benefits of the new, environmentally friendly
services include:
improved rail services in areas to the west of
London and in the Thames Valley
improved public transport access for the local
community to Heathrow Airport and its associated
transport connections into London including
Heathrow Express, Heathrow Connect and London
Underground services ... "

2) "BAA also has an aspiration to extend the Heathrow
Express service to Staines. This would mean an
additional two trains per hour in each direction. ... "

3) "The purpose of this addendum to the initial public
consultation brochure is to clarify how Heathrow
Airtrack trains could be powered and the options
that are being considered.
Overhead Line or Third Rail Electrification?
At the Heathrow Terminal 5 station it is not feasible,
for technical reasons, to operate Heathrow Airtrack
trains with third rail electrification. Therefore trains
in the Terminal 5 station and tunnels will be powered
using overhead line electrification (OHLE). OHLE
involves a system of supports to hold electric cables
some 4-5 metres above the tracks. This system
is currently used by Heathrow Express trains operating
between London Paddington and Heathrow Airport.
As the existing rail network uses third rail electrification
it will be necessary to change from third rail to OHLE
at some point between the Heathrow Terminal 5
station and the rail network in Staines.
The Options
Three options for making the change from OHLE to
third rail electrification are currently being considered:
1 change over as close to the tunnel entrance as
possible, while trains are moving. It is possible that
in this option the overhead lines may not need
to extend onto the SSSI at Staines Moor
2 change over from OHLE to third rail electrification
at the new Staines High Street station, while trains
are stationary
3 run OHLE all the way to the existing Staines station.
This option would allow Heathrow Express services,
which currently use OHLE, to operate to the
existing Staines station and is favoured by BAA
for that reason
In addition, the adaptation of the current rolling
stock used by Heathrow Express is being considered.
If it is possible to adapt the trains, the need to extend
OHLE to the existing Staines station could be avoided.
One of the benefits of extending the Heathrow
Express service to the existing Staines station
is that there would be a direct service from Staines
to London Paddington. Passengers using other
services from London Waterloo would also benefit
from a more frequent service to Heathrow Airport,
as they would be able to interchange at Staines
station and board a Heathrow Express train. ... "

B.

"Paul Scott" wrote in message
...

"DW downunder" noname wrote in message
...

5. Also absent from discussion so far has been AirTrack. In some other
forums, we hear that BAA are firmly behind AirTrack. AIUI, provision has
been made in the Heathrow 5 station box for them. The discussion suggests
that HConn/Crossrail will run through to Reading via H5 and AirTrack.
Those with local route knowledge can fill me in here, but once the link
is made, basically would dual-voltage stock (one assumes Bombardier will
have recovered from their supply line and quality management difficulties
by then - ) provide a through Crossrail all-electric service?


7. While HConn only goes to H123 (old H Central, made more sense!), AIUI
that's a commercial decision. The AirTrack scheme clearly envisages
HConn/Crossrail coming into the H5 box and extending west out of it. What
happens to HEx and links to H123 then would be influenced by the
commercial imperitives of the day.


The latest Airtrack plan (linked below - consultation closed) differs from
your understanding:

http://www.baa.com/assets/Internet/H...sultation2.pdf

It is Heathrow Express they propose extending to run to a new bay platform
at Staines via T5, and the Airtrack trains will run from
Reading/Guildford/Waterloo to T5 only AFAICT.

All indications are that Heathrow Connect (tbrb Crossrail) will continue
to run to T4...

Paul S




You are correct, Paul - and elsewhere in the thread I cite quite a few
sources. There is one from TfL which very clearly wants Crossrail worked
through onto AirTrack. I comment on the issue of the HeX monopoly on access
to the H5 station box from the east as being basically a BAA commercial
decision, and 5+ years is a lot of water to pass under the bridge yet ....
By then, the commercial imperitives may point to a more eclectic approach to
train use on the HeX route from HC to H5.

David

"DW downunder" noname wrote in message
...


You are correct, Paul - and elsewhere in the thread I cite quite a few
sources. There is one from TfL which very clearly wants Crossrail worked
through onto AirTrack. I comment on the issue of the HeX monopoly on
access to the H5 station box from the east as being basically a BAA
commercial decision, and 5+ years is a lot of water to pass under the
bridge yet .... By then, the commercial imperitives may point to a more
eclectic approach to train use on the HeX route from HC to H5.


I think previous discussions have noted that without major work the box
under T5 does not allow for through running to the east from the Airtrack
platforms, and only a single connection from one of the present HEx
platforms to Airtrack, with a junction west of the station.

It looks as though a certain degree of inflexibility has been designed in.
Intentionally?

Paul

In message
, at
04:29:07 on Thu, 7 May 2009, Chris
remarked:
I thought the residents in the vicinity of Maidenhead were opposed to
the ugly looking OHL? Or have they come to terms with it now.

Do they have any choice? Permitted development on the railways means
that they don't need planning permissions....

Maybe, however Wikipedia claims the Crossrail Environmental Statement
includes:

"It is proposed that the OHLE over Maidenhead railway bridge will use
masts with wires suspended from cantilevers, since these will be
visually lighter structures than the gantries to be used along other
parts of the route. The masts will however, have a significant adverse
landscape impact: they will affect important views along the river and
the character of the river corridor; they will affect the setting of the
Riverside Conservation Area; and they will affect the setting of the
listed railway bridge and the setting of the adjacent Grade I listed
road bridge.
--
Roland Perry