On Jul 22, 3:43*am, Stephen Furley wrote:
On 21 July, 18:53, 1506 wrote:

Thus far, I have not read the report. *My initial reaction to you post
is that not going to Heathrow is good. *

Why is not going to Heathrow good?

1. It lengthens the journey to Birmingham.
2. It will be difficult to construct. There will be land-take and
destruction of property.
3. It will distort the carrying capacity. Folks making short Euston
to Airport journeys will take seats that could be used for London
Birmingham passengers.

"Graeme" wrote in message

In message
Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 15:06:29 on
Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Graeme remarked:
The station is quite a distance from the customs exit, and by
default people seem to be sent in exactly the wrong direction (ie
to the south not the north) as they emerge.

Is that a signage problem or just the fact that the customs halls
point you south as you leave?

There's a long "receiving line" where people stand holding up names
etc, and that forms to the south of the exit that most people appear
to emerge from (is it the green lane, I don't know) so people just
troop along following the crowd, getting ever further from the
station.

OK so people are sheep, is there adequate signage?

Not for the 'short cut' route. You don't get lost, but they don't help
you take the shortest route. Ideally, there should be separate exits for
those waiting to be greeted, and those heading straight for the
station/car park/taxi rank, etc.

Ok, why is going to Heathrow bad? *Wouldn't it enable international
arriving passengers with short-haul connections, e.g. to make these by
rail, rather than by air? *


Name one.

Those international passengers currently using internal air
connections that could make use of HS2 as an alternative are very
small in number, just Manchester really.

Heathrow is terrible for land transport,
buses which take ages, Underground which takes ages and has little
space for luggage, or rail which only gets you to Paddington.

Yes, which is why local rail connections at Heathrow need to be
improved far more urgently than providing HS2.

It would be rather missing the point to give Heathrow a station on HS2
whilst you still can’t get to such places as Reading, Guildford,
Croydon, Windsor or Wimbledon by rail.

On 22 July, 16:55, allantracy wrote:
Ok, why is going to Heathrow bad? *Wouldn't it enable international
arriving passengers with short-haul connections, e.g. to make these by
rail, rather than by air? *

Name one.

Oops, missed out a word. Birmingham was the one I was thinking of,
but there must be others.

First we had Foster (on the IEP) and now Mawhinney (on HS2). *Lord
alone knows how these people were chosen for these tasks.


I couldn’t agree more with everything there.

However, there is one alternative you do not mention.

Why not let the market decide what HS2 should look like?

In other words, let’s just build the most cost effective solution for
the biggest potential market.

I’m willing to bet such a solution would not only look rather
different to the current proposal for HS2 but it would be rather more
viable as well.

The current proposal is grandiose and completely OTT, almost
guaranteed to be an expensive white elephant, and what’s that going to
achieve politically for any future proposals such as Scotland, the
East Midlands or Middlesbrough?

"allantracy" wrote in message

Ok, why is going to Heathrow bad? Wouldn't it enable international
arriving passengers with short-haul connections, e.g. to make these
by rail, rather than by air?


Name one.

Those international passengers currently using internal air
connections that could make use of HS2 as an alternative are very
small in number, just Manchester really.

Heathrow is terrible for land transport,
buses which take ages, Underground which takes ages and has little
space for luggage, or rail which only gets you to Paddington.

Yes, which is why local rail connections at Heathrow need to be
improved far more urgently than providing HS2.

It would be rather missing the point to give Heathrow a station on HS2
whilst you still can’t get to such places as Reading, Guildford,
Croydon, Windsor or Wimbledon by rail.

Of course, AirTrack is meant to greatly improve Heathrow's connectivity
to the SWT routes, and it should be in place years before HS2 is even
started.

I note however the notion he seems to be putting forward that OOC could
itself be the London terminus of the HS2 line. I suppose that could spare
the significant costs of adapting/ rebuilding Euston, plus the costs of
bringing the line into Euston, but despite Crossrail it'd mean access wasn't
so easy.


The existing WCML passes close to Old Oak Common and it could get you
to Euston if so desired.

If all HS2 services are to stop at Old Oak Common then building a 200
mph new railway just for the short distance further to Euston is very
silly.

I mean, the trains probably wouldn’t get much above 60 mph before they
would be slowing down again.

In message , at 16:20:59 on Thu,
22 Jul 2010, Graeme remarked:

I'll try not leave on a summer Sunday night then ... too late! I already
have a booking...

heh heh

Just teasing. But I really do have a flight from Stansted to get to a
Monday meeting, late on Sunday night in September.

Arrivals was what I was thinking of, especially when the on-time airline is
90 minutes late again and the last train is long gone.

I know, I've been dumped back there in the small hours ("Go go go, late
late late") with no transport back to Cambridge before now.

--
Roland Perry

In message
"Recliner" wrote:

"allantracy" wrote in message

Ok, why is going to Heathrow bad? Wouldn't it enable international
arriving passengers with short-haul connections, e.g. to make these
by rail, rather than by air?


Name one.

Those international passengers currently using internal air
connections that could make use of HS2 as an alternative are very
small in number, just Manchester really.

Heathrow is terrible for land transport,
buses which take ages, Underground which takes ages and has little
space for luggage, or rail which only gets you to Paddington.

Yes, which is why local rail connections at Heathrow need to be
improved far more urgently than providing HS2.

It would be rather missing the point to give Heathrow a station on HS2
whilst you still can’t get to such places as Reading, Guildford,
Croydon, Windsor or Wimbledon by rail.

Of course, AirTrack is meant to greatly improve Heathrow's connectivity
to the SWT routes, and it should be in place years before HS2 is even
started.


You are making the rash assumption that Airtrack will ever actually happen.

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net/

In message
, at
08:26:47 on Thu, 22 Jul 2010, 1506 remarked:

Folks making short Euston to Airport journeys will take seats that
could be used for London Birmingham passengers.

Not if you don't sell tickets (aka make Heathrow "pick up only"
northbound)
--
Roland Perry