On 7 May, 16:43, "Paul Scott" wrote:
"MIG" wrote in message

...

On 7 May, 14:59, "Recliner" wrote:
The commentators seem to be pretty clear that it won't be very long
before there's another general election (a couple of years max), so I
suspect that Crossrail will remain, though perhaps in a truncated form,
but no other large transport projects will progress very much.

In what sense can Crossrail be truncated? *Do you mean no
electrification beyond Hayes and Harlington?

If so, it won't really be Crossrail, just a pointless tunnel.
Perfectly plausible of course.

A few pessimists seem to have suggested the Abbey Wood branch could be
truncated north of the river, *which could save a few quid...

Paul S

Well, they could run through from Barking on existing lines. Not much
point extending to Barking Creek if it doesn't cross the river.

On Fri, 7 May 2010 16:43:50 +0100, "Paul Scott"
wrote:


"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 7 May, 14:59, "Recliner" wrote:

The commentators seem to be pretty clear that it won't be very long
before there's another general election (a couple of years max), so I
suspect that Crossrail will remain, though perhaps in a truncated form,
but no other large transport projects will progress very much.

In what sense can Crossrail be truncated? Do you mean no
electrification beyond Hayes and Harlington?

If so, it won't really be Crossrail, just a pointless tunnel.
Perfectly plausible of course.

A few pessimists seem to have suggested the Abbey Wood branch could be
truncated north of the river, which could save a few quid...


There is an option that has recently been worked on which would cut
Crossrail back to Heathrow in the west.

Other options that have been worked on include: shortening the station
tunnels to suit the maximum 10-car trains, rather than building them
for 12-car trains which are not expected to be needed for the next 30
years; building the running tunnels more slowly meaning that fewer
tunnelling machines would need to be purchased; cutting back the Abbey
Wood branch (as mentioned above); and the most draconian option, which
is to continue with the enabling works and portal construction plus
some preparatory station works while delaying the construction of the
running tunnels and station tunnels for several years until the
economy has improved sufficiently.

It is quite difficult to imagine that the current Crossrail scheme
will survive unchanged. This applies regardless of which party or
combination of parties takes power.

On May 7, 6:57*pm, Bruce wrote:

On Fri, 7 May 2010 16:43:50 +0100, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

"MIG" wrote:

On 7 May, 14:59, "Recliner" wrote:

The commentators seem to be pretty clear that it won't be very long
before there's another general election (a couple of years max), so I
suspect that Crossrail will remain, though perhaps in a truncated form,
but no other large transport projects will progress very much.

In what sense can Crossrail be truncated? *Do you mean no
electrification beyond Hayes and Harlington?

If so, it won't really be Crossrail, just a pointless tunnel.
Perfectly plausible of course.

A few pessimists seem to have suggested the Abbey Wood branch could be
truncated north of the river, *which could save a few quid...

There is an option that has recently been worked on which would cut
Crossrail back to Heathrow in the west. *

Other options that have been worked on include: shortening the station
tunnels to suit the maximum 10-car trains, rather than building them
for 12-car trains which are not expected to be needed for the next 30
years; *building the running tunnels more slowly meaning that fewer
tunnelling machines would need to be purchased; cutting back the Abbey
Wood branch (as mentioned above); and the most draconian option, which
is to continue with the enabling works and portal construction plus
some preparatory station works while delaying the construction of the
running tunnels and station tunnels for several years until the
economy has improved sufficiently.

It is quite difficult to imagine that the current Crossrail scheme
will survive unchanged. *This applies regardless of which party or
combination of parties takes power.

You've changed your tune.

On Fri, 7 May 2010 11:28:17 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:


On May 7, 6:57*pm, Bruce wrote:

On Fri, 7 May 2010 16:43:50 +0100, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

"MIG" wrote:

On 7 May, 14:59, "Recliner" wrote:

The commentators seem to be pretty clear that it won't be very long
before there's another general election (a couple of years max), so I
suspect that Crossrail will remain, though perhaps in a truncated form,
but no other large transport projects will progress very much.

In what sense can Crossrail be truncated? *Do you mean no
electrification beyond Hayes and Harlington?

If so, it won't really be Crossrail, just a pointless tunnel.
Perfectly plausible of course.

A few pessimists seem to have suggested the Abbey Wood branch could be
truncated north of the river, *which could save a few quid...

There is an option that has recently been worked on which would cut
Crossrail back to Heathrow in the west. *

Other options that have been worked on include: shortening the station
tunnels to suit the maximum 10-car trains, rather than building them
for 12-car trains which are not expected to be needed for the next 30
years; *building the running tunnels more slowly meaning that fewer
tunnelling machines would need to be purchased; cutting back the Abbey
Wood branch (as mentioned above); and the most draconian option, which
is to continue with the enabling works and portal construction plus
some preparatory station works while delaying the construction of the
running tunnels and station tunnels for several years until the
economy has improved sufficiently.

It is quite difficult to imagine that the current Crossrail scheme
will survive unchanged. *This applies regardless of which party or
combination of parties takes power.

You've changed your tune.


No, I haven't. I was merely reporting what is happening at Crossrail
without making any comment on whether I agree with it, or not. For
the last few weeks there has been a massive effort going into costing
various alternative scenarios so there will be ready-made answers to
the new government's questions.

In any case, the economic situation has got considerably worse since I
last commented on whether I thought Crossrail would go ahead. The
economy is now in a very desperate state - in some respects worse than
in Greece.

Given that changed situation, I would now be surprised if Crossrail
isn't delayed, re-phased, cut back or postponed, at least in parts.
Things were very different only a few months ago.

Now that savings in government spending of £60-70 billion per annum
are being discussed. It is difficult to ignore a single £16 billion
scheme for which the immediate need may no longer be so great because
of this severe recession.

But I repeat - I made no comment on whether I agreed it should be cut
back, or not. That has to be a decision for the elected politicians.

On Fri, 7 May 2010, Basil Jet wrote:

Announcement due at 2:30pm.

Stuck on a number 87 somewhere, is he?

tom

--
This isn't right. This isn't even wrong.

On 08/05/2010 18:55, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 7 May 2010, Basil Jet wrote:

Announcement due at 2:30pm.

Stuck on a number 87 somewhere, is he?

He got there at last!