Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 20:27:59 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:

I don't believe that absurdly low cost figure. In 1992 terms, the cost of
the full Piccadilly line extension, including the four stations, was
probably well over £250m, maybe closer to £500m.

If you don't accept the contemporaneous figure of £26m build cost when
it opened, then other discussion is futile. Can you come up with a
better figure from the archives - if you do we can resume talking about
the return on investment.

As you well know, it wasn't a contemporaneous figure. It was an absurdly
low estimate, from an aviation magazine, from years earlier, that was not
only many times too small for even the original simple 1977 extension, but
also couldn't have taken into account the eventual scope of the project,
with four stations rather than two, and the extended tunnels to T4 and T5.


Building those extensions in three stages also pushed up the costs, with
the junctions for the T4 and T5 lines having to be added years later. The
T4 loop is also longer than it needs to be, as it was originally planned to
include the T5 station on it. Those all push up the costs way beyond the
original 1970's project, let alone wildly optimistic 1960s guesses.

So we have no contemporaneous figure, and I can't find any on the web (it's
hard to find documents and contemporary news reports on the web from so
long before there was a web).

So I have used the next best thing, the costs of three other underground
London railways built slightly later, to get a ballpark figure of around
£1.5bn. Even if projects were cheaper in real terms in the 1970s, the total
won't have been much below £1bn in 2000 terms.

However, even the 1960s Victoria line cost £7m per mile in 1960s money,
which shows just how low that £26m is. Even if the Picc extension was as
cheap to build per mile as the mid 1960s Victoria line, that would still be
close to £80m per mile in 2000 money, which would make the cost somewhere
north of £600m in 2000 money terms.

See
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/4934f...#axzz470nUlC5w

So, however you calculate it, the cost in 2000 money terms is somewhere in
the £0.6 to £1.5m range. As we don't have a better figure, let's simplify
the sums and assume it was in the £1bn bracket, again in 2000 money.

Now try and tell us that the fares income will ever pay back that cost.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Anecdotally, there was a last minute realisation in the formation of TfL that it was being given control of those urban motorways, but didn't have the legal authority to manage motorways, therefore they were hurriedly declassified.

The London end of the M11 has a 50 mph speed limit.
That has TfL's finger prints all over it. There was no such
speed limit until TfL appeared on the scene. I don't recall
the M4 having a speed limit in the London area before either.
Is it quite certain that TfL have no control of motorways in
the Greater London area?

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Recliner wrote:

Roland Perry wrote:
In message

-sept ember.org, at 20:27:59 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:

I don't believe that absurdly low cost figure. In 1992 terms, the
cost of the full Piccadilly line extension, including the four
stations, was probably well over £250m, maybe closer to £500m.

If you don't accept the contemporaneous figure of £26m build cost
when it opened, then other discussion is futile. Can you come up
with a better figure from the archives - if you do we can resume
talking about the return on investment.

As you well know, it wasn't a contemporaneous figure. It was an
absurdly low estimate, from an aviation magazine, from years earlier,
that was not only many times too small for even the original simple
1977 extension, but also couldn't have taken into account the
eventual scope of the project, with four stations rather than two,
and the extended tunnels to T4 and T5.

£26m is in the right ballpark. According to Hansard from 15 Dec 1976

Mr. Sillars asked the Secretary of State for Transport what is his
latest estimate of the Government share of costs associated with
building the Piccadilly underground line extension to Heathrow Airport.

Mr. William Rodgers - My Department contributed 25 per cent. of the
total expenditure of £18.5 million incurred up to 31st March 1975.
Expenditure since then, estimated at £7.2 million to 31st December
1976, qualifies under the Local Government Act 1974 for transport
supplementary grant at the rate of 70 per cent. The total cost of the
work outstanding at 31st December 1976 is estimated to be £3.6 million.

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/w...761215_CWA_194

So the total cost was approx 18.5 + 7.2 + 3.6 = 29.3 million.

Using RPI, that would be around £220 million in todays money.

Peter Smyth

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Peter Smyth wrote:
Recliner wrote:

Roland Perry wrote:
In message

-sept ember.org, at 20:27:59 on Tue, 26 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:

I don't believe that absurdly low cost figure. In 1992 terms, the
cost of the full Piccadilly line extension, including the four
stations, was probably well over £250m, maybe closer to £500m.

If you don't accept the contemporaneous figure of £26m build cost
when it opened, then other discussion is futile. Can you come up
with a better figure from the archives - if you do we can resume
talking about the return on investment.

As you well know, it wasn't a contemporaneous figure. It was an
absurdly low estimate, from an aviation magazine, from years earlier,
that was not only many times too small for even the original simple
1977 extension, but also couldn't have taken into account the
eventual scope of the project, with four stations rather than two,
and the extended tunnels to T4 and T5.

£26m is in the right ballpark. According to Hansard from 15 Dec 1976

Mr. Sillars asked the Secretary of State for Transport what is his
latest estimate of the Government share of costs associated with
building the Piccadilly underground line extension to Heathrow Airport.

Mr. William Rodgers - My Department contributed 25 per cent. of the
total expenditure of £18.5 million incurred up to 31st March 1975.
Expenditure since then, estimated at £7.2 million to 31st December
1976, qualifies under the Local Government Act 1974 for transport
supplementary grant at the rate of 70 per cent. The total cost of the
work outstanding at 31st December 1976 is estimated to be £3.6 million.

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/w...761215_CWA_194

So the total cost was approx 18.5 + 7.2 + 3.6 = 29.3 million.

Using RPI, that would be around £220 million in todays money.

Of course that was for the original two-station extension, but it
nevertheless seems very low (and presumably doesn't include anything for
the several additional trains needed for the extension, but presumably
ordered in anticipation).

What was the total cost including the two separate, subsequent extensions
for T4 and T5, the latter also requiring a new grade-separated underground
junction for the T4 and T5 lines to the west of the T123 station? Those
extensions would certainly have much more than doubled the total cost.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 20:50:55 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 16:51:12 +0100, JNugent
wrote:



I always thought the Highways Agency was in charge of those motorways,
not TfL; but putting that to one side it does look as if the majority of
the money will be going on public transport, which will then pay much of
it back through fares.

TaL is well-known not to have any say over motorways (thank God).

Not having direct control is not the same as not having a say. Also,
TfL inherited at least two motorways (A102(M) and M41) but these were
immediately re-classified as non-motorway special roads.


Was the Westway under TfL's (or its predecessor's) control when it was
still a motorway? There was a time when I commuted to work on it most
days.

The A40(M) is Westway, the M41 (now part of the A3220) was the bit
running down from it to Shepherds Bush roundabout forming part of the
planned West Cross Route.

The Pathetic Motorways version is :-
"So why isn't it a motorway anymore?
For purely political reasons. In 2000, all roads within Greater London
were transferred to a new body, "Transport for London" [which is
clearly wrong as most roads come under the burghs]. Unfortunately,
whoever wrote the legislation made an error, and TfL have no power to
be the authority in charge of motorways..."

http://motorwayarchive.ihtservices.c...t-cross-route/
says :-
"Following the formation of Transport for London (TfL), these roads
were reclassified in May 2000. This change was required because the
Greater London Authority (GLA) Act does not give the Mayor for London
powers to be the highway authority for motorways, but these roads were
being transferred to the Mayor. It was therefore necessary to remove
their motorway status before June 2000 when the Mayor took office. "
which doesn't seem to be a relevant reason rather than when TfL had
relevant powers vested in it.

The actual sequence of events might then be that legislation
transferred the motorways to TfL on the date that TfL was created but
between that legislation being passed and the creation day further
legislation removed the motorways from the process.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 22:18:44 on Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Mr. William Rodgers - My Department contributed 25 per cent. of the
total expenditure of £18.5 million incurred up to 31st March 1975.
Expenditure since then, estimated at £7.2 million to 31st December
1976, qualifies under the Local Government Act 1974 for transport
supplementary grant at the rate of 70 per cent. The total cost of the
work outstanding at 31st December 1976 is estimated to be £3.6 million.

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/w...761215_CWA_194

So the total cost was approx 18.5 + 7.2 + 3.6 = 29.3 million.

Using RPI, that would be around £220 million in todays money.

Of course that was for the original two-station extension, but it
nevertheless seems very low (and presumably doesn't include anything for
the several additional trains needed for the extension, but presumably
ordered in anticipation).

Tube lines have fleets of identical trains, you can't just order a few
more later.

What was the total cost including the two separate, subsequent extensions
for T4 and T5, the latter also requiring a new grade-separated underground
junction for the T4 and T5 lines to the west of the T123 station? Those
extensions would certainly have much more than doubled the total cost.

And generate double the fares.
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 22:18:44 on Wed, 27 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Mr. William Rodgers - My Department contributed 25 per cent. of the
total expenditure of £18.5 million incurred up to 31st March 1975.
Expenditure since then, estimated at £7.2 million to 31st December
1976, qualifies under the Local Government Act 1974 for transport
supplementary grant at the rate of 70 per cent. The total cost of the
work outstanding at 31st December 1976 is estimated to be £3.6 million.

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/w...761215_CWA_194

So the total cost was approx 18.5 + 7.2 + 3.6 = 29.3 million.

Using RPI, that would be around £220 million in todays money.

Of course that was for the original two-station extension, but it
nevertheless seems very low (and presumably doesn't include anything for
the several additional trains needed for the extension, but presumably
ordered in anticipation).

Tube lines have fleets of identical trains, you can't just order a few
more later.

Do you really think that?

I must be imagining the extra train ordered for the Met to cover the
Watford Junction extension, the extra carriages and trains ordered for the
Jubilee line (even after the original UK factory that assembled them had
closed), the extra carriages and trains ordered for the Overground, the
extra carriages and Pendolino trains ordered for Virgin (also after the UK
assembly plant had closed), the pending order for new Northern line trains
for the Battersea extension, etc.

But in this case, the 73TS were built while the Heathrow extension was
under construction, and a large enough fleet to cover it was ordered.
Without that extension, the order would have been for a significantly
smaller fleet. They were later modified to have more luggage space by the
doors, with fewer seats.


What was the total cost including the two separate, subsequent extensions
for T4 and T5, the latter also requiring a new grade-separated underground
junction for the T4 and T5 lines to the west of the T123 station? Those
extensions would certainly have much more than doubled the total cost.

And generate double the fares.

Probably not double (have you seen how few people use the T4 station?), but
more certainly. But if you're going to estimate that total incremental
revenue (as you did), then you also have to look at the total investment.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 08:03:57 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:

the 73TS were built while the Heathrow extension was
under construction, and a large enough fleet to cover it was ordered.
Without that extension, the order would have been for a significantly
smaller fleet.


They were later modified to have more luggage space by the
doors, with fewer seats.

What was the total cost including the two separate, subsequent extensions
for T4 and T5, the latter also requiring a new grade-separated underground
junction for the T4 and T5 lines to the west of the T123 station? Those
extensions would certainly have much more than doubled the total cost.

And generate double the fares.

Probably not double (have you seen how few people use the T4 station?), but
more certainly.

Latest annual station usage stats:

T123 7.49m
T5 3.90m
T4 2.35m

But if you're going to estimate that total incremental revenue (as you
did), then you also have to look at the total investment.

To simplify things I've only been looking at the cost, and revenue of,
Phase 1, for most of the thread now.
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

On Tue, 26 Apr 2016 07:59:18 BST, Bob Martin
wrote:

in 1378970 20160425 090854 Graeme Wall wrote:
On 25/04/2016 09:00, Recliner wrote:
From
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...en-for-transpo
rt-for-london/

Quote:

Heathrow's controversial proposal to build a third runway would place a
£16bn burden on Transport for London, the agency has said, as it would
require upgrades to the road and railway networks that service the airport.

TfL said Heathrow had "substantially underestimated" the impact of the
extra runway, as it released a figure eight times higher than the £2.2bn
that the airport had calculated.

The transport authority instead estimates that the development, which could
lead to heavier congestion on London's roads, buses and trains, will have a
£18.4bn price tag.

Heathrow has previously promised that £1.2bn would be raised through public
contributions, with the airport spending another £1bn, leaving a shortfall
of more than £16bn.

... continues


Haven't they put off the announcement yet again?

They'll keep putting it off until all the transit stuff moves to Frankfurt or Amsterdam.

Or, the financial sector starts to move to Frankfurt.

Regardless of what happens at Heathrow, surely Gatwick needs
expansion. When the Weald oil fields come on-stream, oilmen are not
going to trek from Heathrow to deepest Sussex.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden forTfL
 

Roland Perry writes:

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 08:03:57 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Probably not double (have you seen how few people use the T4 station?), but
more certainly.

Latest annual station usage stats:

T123 7.49m
T5 3.90m
T4 2.35m

T123 serves 3 terminals, so assuming it represents equal numbers of
passengers using each terminal, there is not much difference between
2.49m passengers using the station for access to each of terminals 1, 2
and 3 and the 2.35m who use the T4 station.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Graham Murray wrote:
Roland Perry writes:

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 08:03:57 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Probably not double (have you seen how few people use the T4 station?), but
more certainly.

Latest annual station usage stats:

T123 7.49m
T5 3.90m
T4 2.35m

T123 serves 3 terminals, so assuming it represents equal numbers of
passengers using each terminal, there is not much difference between
2.49m passengers using the station for access to each of terminals 1, 2
and 3 and the 2.35m who use the T4 station.

Three terminals? No Heathrow station serves more than two terminals.

Not lately. As a hint, it's no longer called T123 station.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 08:03:57 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:

the 73TS were built while the Heathrow extension was
under construction, and a large enough fleet to cover it was ordered.
Without that extension, the order would have been for a significantly
smaller fleet.


They were later modified to have more luggage space by the
doors, with fewer seats.

What was the total cost including the two separate, subsequent extensions
for T4 and T5, the latter also requiring a new grade-separated underground
junction for the T4 and T5 lines to the west of the T123 station? Those
extensions would certainly have much more than doubled the total cost.

And generate double the fares.

Probably not double (have you seen how few people use the T4 station?), but
more certainly.

Latest annual station usage stats:

T123 7.49m
T5 3.90m
T4 2.35m

But if you're going to estimate that total incremental revenue (as you
did), then you also have to look at the total investment.

To simplify things I've only been looking at the cost, and revenue of,
Phase 1, for most of the thread now.

Costs and revenues in current money terms? But I'm not sure you can
separate them anyway: the central station is served by trains using all
three phases of the project.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for
 

In article ,
(Graham Murray) wrote:

Roland Perry writes:

In message

-septembe
r.org, at 08:03:57 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Probably not double (have you seen how few people use the T4 station?),
but more certainly.

Latest annual station usage stats:

T123 7.49m
T5 3.90m
T4 2.35m

T123 serves 3 terminals, so assuming it represents equal numbers of
passengers using each terminal, there is not much difference between
2.49m passengers using the station for access to each of terminals 1, 2
and 3 and the 2.35m who use the T4 station.

Actually it's some time since it served 3 terminals. It's been 2 now for a
bit.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message
-sept
ember.org, Recliner wrote:
I don't believe that absurdly low cost figure. In 1992 terms, the cost of
the full Piccadilly line extension, including the four stations, was
probably well over £250m, maybe closer to £500m.

Rails Through The Clay, which is usually pretty accurate on things,
states that the original Heathrow extension was estimated at 15 million
in 1970, with the final figure given as 30.2 million in 1978. Hounslow
West to Hatton Cross civil engineering was 4 million. Tunnelling on to
Heathrow Central was 2.25 million; the station was another 1.2 million
(those three are all contract prices). The 1973 Tube Stock cost 40.25
million for 87.5 6-car trains. If I've calculated things correctly, the
extension added 4 trains to the requirements for the line (15 minutes
extra running time, 15 tph service at the time), so 1.84 million. Don't
ask me where the rest of the money went.

At opening, the fare to central London was 80p.

The T4 loop was 27 million, of which 10.6 million was tunnelling.

HEX, which was under construction when the book was published, is listed
as 280 million.

Someone else can try converting these to today's money.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message , at 18:40:42 on Thu,
28 Apr 2016, Graham Murray remarked:
Probably not double (have you seen how few people use the T4 station?), but
more certainly.

Latest annual station usage stats:

T123 7.49m
T5 3.90m
T4 2.35m

T123 serves 3 terminals,

There's only two at the moment.

so assuming it represents equal numbers of passengers using each
terminal, there is not much difference between 2.49m passengers using
the station for access to each of terminals 1, 2 and 3 and the 2.35m
who use the T4 station.

Not sure what your point is - other than perhaps all the terminals get
quite a lot of passengers.
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for
 

wrote:
In article ,
(Graham Murray) wrote:

Roland Perry writes:

In message

-septembe
r.org, at 08:03:57 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Probably not double (have you seen how few people use the T4 station?),
but more certainly.

Latest annual station usage stats:

T123 7.49m
T5 3.90m
T4 2.35m

T123 serves 3 terminals, so assuming it represents equal numbers of
passengers using each terminal, there is not much difference between
2.49m passengers using the station for access to each of terminals 1, 2
and 3 and the 2.35m who use the T4 station.

Actually it's some time since it served 3 terminals. It's been 2 now for a
bit.

It went down to two for some time, then back up to three for a transitional
period of a year, and since June last year, has been permanently down to
two terminals.

That's how it's likely to stay for a while, though it's possible that those
two terminals will be merged into one at some stage, as T2 grows and T3 is
demolished. So, eventually, the whole central area could consist of just
one very large terminal, though I'm not clear whether it will all be called
one terminal or two.

Further into the future, if a third runway is built, there will be a new
western terminal, which may be adjacent to T5, and share its three
underground stations.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for
 

In message , at 14:24:35
on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, remarked:
Latest annual station usage stats:

T123 7.49m
T5 3.90m
T4 2.35m

T123 serves 3 terminals, so assuming it represents equal numbers of
passengers using each terminal, there is not much difference between
2.49m passengers using the station for access to each of terminals 1, 2
and 3 and the 2.35m who use the T4 station.

Actually it's some time since it served 3 terminals. It's been 2 now for a
bit.

Nevertheless, TfL's usage stats for 2015 still call it T123.
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message
-septe
mber.org, at 19:13:36 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Latest annual station usage stats:

T123 7.49m
T5 3.90m
T4 2.35m

But if you're going to estimate that total incremental revenue (as you
did), then you also have to look at the total investment.

To simplify things I've only been looking at the cost, and revenue of,
Phase 1, for most of the thread now.

Costs and revenues in current money terms?

Yes I did the sums but you dismissed them, about the same time you
overestimated the phase 1 build cost by at least 5x.

But I'm not sure you can separate them anyway: the central station is
served by trains using all three phases of the project.

Yes, but without phase 2 and 3, people still needed to get to T123, and
they'd all have done it direct, rather than some via T4.
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message , Someone Somewhere
wrote:
Who says that we're getting equivalent value on each different piece of
work? Anecdotally the cost of building railways seems to be going up,

Modern Railways used to use a "Ford Factor" of pi for increases since
privatisation. Some recent issues were using a "carton of milk"
comparison, but I forget the actual numbers.

and that's before you take into account the stupidly over-engineered
stations and so on of the JLE.

Why are you assuming they are over-engineered? They're mostly built in
very different ground to the Blue Clay. I remember reading at the time
that the "big box" design used at some stations was actually the
cheapest way to build them.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for
 

In message
-septe
mber.org, at 19:46:57 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Actually it's some time since it served 3 terminals. It's been 2 now for a
bit.

It went down to two for some time, then back up to three for a transitional
period of a year, and since June last year, has been permanently down to
two terminals.

That's how it's likely to stay for a while, though it's possible that those
two terminals will be merged into one at some stage, as T2 grows and T3 is
demolished. So, eventually, the whole central area could consist of just
one very large terminal, though I'm not clear whether it will all be called
one terminal or two.

"Central terminal" probably.

Further into the future, if a third runway is built, there will be a new
western terminal, which may be adjacent to T5, and share its three
underground stations.

There are only two. Recent poorly-written articles about a "secret
station" are in fact about extra as-yet-unused platforms at the heavy
rail station.
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message
-sept
ember.org, Recliner wrote:
Tube lines have fleets of identical trains, you can't just order a few
more later.

Not always, they don't. Even the Victoria Line used to run a mix of 1967
and 1972 Tube Stock.

But in this case, the 73TS were built while the Heathrow extension was
under construction, and a large enough fleet to cover it was ordered.
Without that extension, the order would have been for a significantly
smaller fleet.

Actually, I don't think so. The order was for 87.5 trains. I reckon that
the extension only needed 4 of those.

Let's do a finger-in-the-air test. It takes about 85 minutes from
Cockfosters to Heathrow Central and 94 to Uxbridge. The last notes I
have say that each of these gets 12 trains per hour in the peak (5
minute spacing). Assume that at each end a train departs as one arrives,
so there's always one at the terminus. That would mean (85+5)*2/5 = 36
trains for the Heathrow branch and (94+5)*2/5 = 40 for Uxbridge
(probably actually 38 or 39 because some terminate at Ruislip). That's
about 75 trains. The rest allow you to thicken the service in the peaks
and provide spares.

Ah, another source says the current service uses 76 trains on Saturdays
and 68 on Sundays.

So the stock order was very probably based on that 12 tph figure.

Hounslow West to Heathrow Central will be 7 or 8 minutes of those 85, so
the extension adds 15 minutes to a round trip. So without it we'd need 3
trains less. Plus a fourth as a margin. QED.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message , at 20:46:10 on Thu, 28
Apr 2016, Clive D. W. Feather remarked:
I don't believe that absurdly low cost figure. In 1992 terms, the cost of
the full Piccadilly line extension, including the four stations, was
probably well over £250m, maybe closer to £500m.

Rails Through The Clay, which is usually pretty accurate on things,
states that the original Heathrow extension was estimated at 15 million
in 1970, with the final figure given as 30.2 million in 1978. Hounslow
West to Hatton Cross civil engineering was 4 million. Tunnelling on to
Heathrow Central was 2.25 million; the station was another 1.2 million
(those three are all contract prices). The 1973 Tube Stock cost 40.25
million for 87.5 6-car trains. If I've calculated things correctly, the
extension added 4 trains to the requirements for the line (15 minutes
extra running time, 15 tph service at the time), so 1.84 million. Don't
ask me where the rest of the money went.

It went, as previously noted, on works east of the extension to
accommodate the extra train and passenger traffic.

The cost of the extra trains wasn't in the previously cited £26m which
was all civils.

At opening, the fare to central London was 80p.

That's about £6 in today's money.
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, Recliner wrote:
I don't believe that absurdly low cost figure. In 1992 terms, the cost of
the full Piccadilly line extension, including the four stations, was
probably well over £250m, maybe closer to £500m.

Rails Through The Clay, which is usually pretty accurate on things,
states that the original Heathrow extension was estimated at 15 million
in 1970, with the final figure given as 30.2 million in 1978. Hounslow
West to Hatton Cross civil engineering was 4 million. Tunnelling on to
Heathrow Central was 2.25 million; the station was another 1.2 million
(those three are all contract prices). The 1973 Tube Stock cost 40.25
million for 87.5 6-car trains. If I've calculated things correctly, the
extension added 4 trains to the requirements for the line (15 minutes
extra running time, 15 tph service at the time), so 1.84 million. Don't
ask me where the rest of the money went.

At opening, the fare to central London was 80p.

The T4 loop was 27 million, of which 10.6 million was tunnelling.

HEX, which was under construction when the book was published, is listed
as 280 million.

Someone else can try converting these to today's money.

The original 1977 extension comes to £169.6m in today's money. The T4 1986
extension comes to £73.9m. So that's £243.5m.

I wonder what the 2008 T5 extension cost? And how much of that was paid by
TfL? I know BAA paid for most of it, but also takes a proportion of the
fares revenue.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, Recliner wrote:
Tube lines have fleets of identical trains, you can't just order a few
more later.

Not always, they don't. Even the Victoria Line used to run a mix of 1967
and 1972 Tube Stock.

But in this case, the 73TS were built while the Heathrow extension was
under construction, and a large enough fleet to cover it was ordered.
Without that extension, the order would have been for a significantly
smaller fleet.

Actually, I don't think so. The order was for 87.5 trains. I reckon that
the extension only needed 4 of those.

I'd guess more, probably six or seven in the peaks. There are four
stations, and there are usually two in the T5 station at any time, and
usually one in the T4 station or at least in the loop. There's another pair
at or near Hatton Cross, and another pair at or near Heathrow Central.



Let's do a finger-in-the-air test. It takes about 85 minutes from
Cockfosters to Heathrow Central and 94 to Uxbridge. The last notes I
have say that each of these gets 12 trains per hour in the peak (5
minute spacing).

Uxbridge doesn't get a 12tph service. It's more like 6tph in the leaks,
less in the off-peak.

Assume that at each end a train departs as one arrives,
so there's always one at the terminus. That would mean (85+5)*2/5 = 36
trains for the Heathrow branch and (94+5)*2/5 = 40 for Uxbridge
(probably actually 38 or 39 because some terminate at Ruislip).

Do any terminate at Ruislip these days? I don't think so. But half of the
trains on that branch terminate at Rayner's Lane.

The Heathrow branches get a much more intense service than Rayner's Lane
branch, which has lost services in favour of the two Heathrow branches.
Probably six or seven of every ten trains running west of Acton Town heads
for one or other of the two Heathrow branches.

That's
about 75 trains. The rest allow you to thicken the service in the peaks
and provide spares.

Ah, another source says the current service uses 76 trains on Saturdays
and 68 on Sundays.

So almost 10% of the service fleet are on the Heathrow extensions at any
time. Allowing for a spare, that means about eight trains in all are needed
for the service west of Hounslow West.


So the stock order was very probably based on that 12 tph figure.

Hounslow West to Heathrow Central will be 7 or 8 minutes of those 85, so
the extension adds 15 minutes to a round trip. So without it we'd need 3
trains less. Plus a fourth as a margin. QED.

No.

As I said, 3/4 trains is an underestimate. It's more like six. You seem
to have forgotten T5, which usually has two trains in the station or
sidings, and T4, which always has a train in the station or loop.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message
-septe
mber.org, at 20:45:59 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
As I said, 3/4 trains is an underestimate. It's more like six. You seem
to have forgotten T5, which usually has two trains in the station or
sidings, and T4, which always has a train in the station or loop.

Do at least *try* to keep up - Clive was talking about the order of 73's
for phase 1.
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 19:46:57 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Actually it's some time since it served 3 terminals. It's been 2 now for a
bit.

It went down to two for some time, then back up to three for a transitional
period of a year, and since June last year, has been permanently down to
two terminals.

That's how it's likely to stay for a while, though it's possible that those
two terminals will be merged into one at some stage, as T2 grows and T3 is
demolished. So, eventually, the whole central area could consist of just
one very large terminal, though I'm not clear whether it will all be called
one terminal or two.

"Central terminal" probably.

Further into the future, if a third runway is built, there will be a new
western terminal, which may be adjacent to T5, and share its three
underground stations.

There are only two. Recent poorly-written articles about a "secret
station" are in fact about extra as-yet-unused platforms at the heavy
rail station.

When it eventually opens, who knows whether it will be shown as a new GWR
station or a pair of extra platforms at what is currently the HEx station?
The GWR station may be gated, the HEx station isn't, as it's free to the
central station.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 20:45:59 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
As I said, 3/4 trains is an underestimate. It's more like six. You seem
to have forgotten T5, which usually has two trains in the station or
sidings, and T4, which always has a train in the station or loop.

Do at least *try* to keep up - Clive was talking about the order of 73's
for phase 1.

If you'd actually read my note, you'd have seen that I pointed out that
several more trains have been moved to the Heathrow branches, at the
expense of the Picc service to Uxbridge. Instead, more Met trains serve
Uxbridge.

So, if you want to be consistent, include the cost of the three or four
extra S8 trains which have replaced Picc trains transferred from the
Uxbridge branch to Heathrow. It also demonstrates that, in some cases, you
can buy extra trains of a different size to supplement a stretched fleet.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message
-septe
mber.org, Recliner wrote:
But in this case, the 73TS were built while the Heathrow extension was
under construction, and a large enough fleet to cover it was ordered.
Without that extension, the order would have been for a significantly
smaller fleet.

Actually, I don't think so. The order was for 87.5 trains. I reckon that
the extension only needed 4 of those.

I'd guess more, probably six or seven in the peaks. There are four
stations, and there are usually two in the T5 station at any time, and
usually one in the T4 station or at least in the loop.

Irrelevant. The stock was ordered in 1971 and delivered starting in
1974. The first plans for the present T4 didn't start until 1977 and the
loop wasn't authorized until 1980. So neither of these would have been
included in the calculations for the order.

There's another pair
at or near Hatton Cross, and another pair at or near Heathrow Central.

That's the four. Actually three; remember that there's no longer a train
sitting for ages at Hounslow West.

Uxbridge doesn't get a 12tph service. It's more like 6tph in the leaks,
less in the off-peak.

The Heathrow branches get a much more intense service than Rayner's Lane
branch, which has lost services in favour of the two Heathrow branches.
Probably six or seven of every ten trains running west of Acton Town heads
for one or other of the two Heathrow branches.

Looking at the evening peak, there's 23 trains leaving Gloucester Road
between 17:00 and 18:00, split 11 to Heathrow (6:5 between the T4 and
T5) and 12 towards Rayners Lane (7 to Uxbridge). There's 23 between
18:00 and 19:00, now split 13:10 (still 7 to Uxbridge). That's not "much
more intense".

That's
about 75 trains. The rest allow you to thicken the service in the peaks
and provide spares.

Ah, another source says the current service uses 76 trains on Saturdays
and 68 on Sundays.

So almost 10% of the service fleet are on the Heathrow extensions at any
time. Allowing for a spare, that means about eight trains in all are needed
for the service west of Hounslow West.

Yes, *but* that wasn't the basis they were ordered on.

So the stock order was very probably based on that 12 tph figure.

As I said, 3/4 trains is an underestimate. It's more like six. You seem
to have forgotten T5, which usually has two trains in the station or
sidings, and T4, which always has a train in the station or loop.

But those other trains have come from better utilization. The stock was
ordered on the assumption of just T123 or *possibly* thinking ahead to a
T4 station on the Stanwell sewage farm site to the south west.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, Recliner wrote:
But in this case, the 73TS were built while the Heathrow extension was
under construction, and a large enough fleet to cover it was ordered.
Without that extension, the order would have been for a significantly
smaller fleet.

Actually, I don't think so. The order was for 87.5 trains. I reckon that
the extension only needed 4 of those.

I'd guess more, probably six or seven in the peaks. There are four
stations, and there are usually two in the T5 station at any time, and
usually one in the T4 station or at least in the loop.

Irrelevant. The stock was ordered in 1971 and delivered starting in
1974. The first plans for the present T4 didn't start until 1977 and the
loop wasn't authorized until 1980. So neither of these would have been
included in the calculations for the order.

There's another pair
at or near Hatton Cross, and another pair at or near Heathrow Central.

That's the four. Actually three; remember that there's no longer a train
sitting for ages at Hounslow West.

Uxbridge doesn't get a 12tph service. It's more like 6tph in the peaks,
less in the off-peak.

The Heathrow branches get a much more intense service than Rayner's Lane
branch, which has lost services in favour of the two Heathrow branches.
Probably six or seven of every ten trains running west of Acton Town heads
for one or other of the two Heathrow branches.

Looking at the evening peak, there's 23 trains leaving Gloucester Road
between 17:00 and 18:00, split 11 to Heathrow (6:5 between the T4 and
T5) and 12 towards Rayners Lane (7 to Uxbridge). There's 23 between
18:00 and 19:00, now split 13:10 (still 7 to Uxbridge). That's not "much
more intense".

Those figures don't sound right.

I've been using the Piccadilly line Rayner's Lane branch since well before
the Heathrow extensions opened, and the service used to be split evenly
between the two western branches. Now, I sometimes have to wait for three
or even four Heathrow trains to pass before a Rayner's Lane or Uxbridge
train shows up. I find it really hard to believe there's any hour in the
day when more trains go to Rayner's Lane/Uxbridge than to Heathrow. My
observation is that at least 60% go to Heathrow.


That's
about 75 trains. The rest allow you to thicken the service in the peaks
and provide spares.

Ah, another source says the current service uses 76 trains on Saturdays
and 68 on Sundays.

So almost 10% of the service fleet are on the Heathrow extensions at any
time. Allowing for a spare, that means about eight trains in all are needed
for the service west of Hounslow West.

Yes, *but* that wasn't the basis they were ordered on.

True, but in effect some of the S stock trains have replaced Piccadilly
trains transferred from the Uxbridge services to Heathrow.


So the stock order was very probably based on that 12 tph figure.

As I said, 3/4 trains is an underestimate. It's more like six. You seem
to have forgotten T5, which usually has two trains in the station or
sidings, and T4, which always has a train in the station or loop.

But those other trains have come from better utilization. The stock was
ordered on the assumption of just T123 or *possibly* thinking ahead to a
T4 station on the Stanwell sewage farm site to the south west.

Yes, agreed, but more trains have been transferred to the Heathrow branches
from Uxbridge, by ordering more S stock trains.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 21:37:39 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
As I said, 3/4 trains is an underestimate. It's more like six. You seem
to have forgotten T5, which usually has two trains in the station or
sidings, and T4, which always has a train in the station or loop.

Do at least *try* to keep up - Clive was talking about the order of 73's
for phase 1.

If you'd actually read my note, you'd have seen that I pointed out that
several more trains have been moved to the Heathrow branches, at the
expense of the Picc service to Uxbridge. Instead, more Met trains serve
Uxbridge.

When did this happen? The time period under discussion is late 70's.
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for
 

In message
-sept
ember.org, at 21:28:54 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:

Further into the future, if a third runway is built, there will be a new
western terminal, which may be adjacent to T5, and share its three
underground stations.

There are only two. Recent poorly-written articles about a "secret
station" are in fact about extra as-yet-unused platforms at the heavy
rail station.

When it eventually opens, who knows whether it will be shown as a new GWR
station or a pair of extra platforms at what is currently the HEx station?
The GWR station may be gated, the HEx station isn't, as it's free to the
central station.

It's inevitable that it'll be just one station because there will be
through trains (I don't think it's yet been decided if HEx or Crossrail
would run the 2tph Paddington-Heathrow-Reading trains; very unlikely to
be FGW or successor).
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 21:37:39 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
As I said, 3/4 trains is an underestimate. It's more like six. You seem
to have forgotten T5, which usually has two trains in the station or
sidings, and T4, which always has a train in the station or loop.

Do at least *try* to keep up - Clive was talking about the order of 73's
for phase 1.

If you'd actually read my note, you'd have seen that I pointed out that
several more trains have been moved to the Heathrow branches, at the
expense of the Picc service to Uxbridge. Instead, more Met trains serve
Uxbridge.

When did this happen? The time period under discussion is late 70's.

We're not just talking about the original 1977 extension, as that can't be
viewed in isolation.

The original 73TS fleet was planned to be large enough for the original
two-station Heathrow extension, which opened just after the fleet started
to enter service from 1975. As suggested upthread, it probably had about
four more trains than would have been needed without that extension.

With the two additional extensions to T4 and T5, more trains were moved to
the Heathrow branches, at the expense of the Rayner's Lane and,
particularly, the Uxbridge services. The Rayner's Lane branch still has a
worse service than when T4 opened, while the Uxbridge branch now gets a
more frequent Met service to compensate for the reduced Picc service. So
about four more S8 trains (which cost about £8m each) were needed to
compensate for the four more 73TS trains serving the Heathrow branches.

So if you want to consider the incremental fares revenue from the Heathrow
services, you need to set that against all the investments in those
services. Obviously a complicating factor in doing those calculations is
that BAA contributed to the construction costs and now benefits from a
share of the fares revenue. Ideally, if the figures were available, you'd
want to include the BAA (now HAL) investments and returns as well, though
the figures may be impossible to obtain.

Incidentally, you can't just look at the Central station in isolation, as
all the trains that serve it also serve T4 or T5.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 21:28:54 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:

Further into the future, if a third runway is built, there will be a new
western terminal, which may be adjacent to T5, and share its three
underground stations.

There are only two. Recent poorly-written articles about a "secret
station" are in fact about extra as-yet-unused platforms at the heavy
rail station.

When it eventually opens, who knows whether it will be shown as a new GWR
station or a pair of extra platforms at what is currently the HEx station?
The GWR station may be gated, the HEx station isn't, as it's free to the
central station.

It's inevitable that it'll be just one station because there will be
through trains (I don't think it's yet been decided if HEx or Crossrail
would run the 2tph Paddington-Heathrow-Reading trains; very unlikely to
be FGW or successor).

Through trains will presumably use the current HEx platform pair. The
currently unused platform pair could be used for a different service,
perhaps to Staines and beyond.

Anyway, this is just an argument about semantics. We all know that T5
included another pair of platforms from the beginning, intended for a
proposed new western service (then Airtrack) which has yet to happen.
They're not secret, but we don't yet know exactly how they'll be accessed
from the terminal building.

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message
-septe
mber.org, at 08:21:42 on Fri, 29 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 21:37:39 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
As I said, 3/4 trains is an underestimate. It's more like six. You seem
to have forgotten T5, which usually has two trains in the station or
sidings, and T4, which always has a train in the station or loop.

Do at least *try* to keep up - Clive was talking about the order of 73's
for phase 1.

If you'd actually read my note, you'd have seen that I pointed out that
several more trains have been moved to the Heathrow branches, at the
expense of the Picc service to Uxbridge. Instead, more Met trains serve
Uxbridge.

When did this happen? The time period under discussion is late 70's.

We're not just talking about the original 1977 extension, as that can't be
viewed in isolation.

Until you agree on the parameters for ROI for the phase 1 of the
project, it's futile to be discussing the parameters for all three
phases.

The original 73TS fleet was planned to be large enough for the original
two-station Heathrow extension, which opened just after the fleet started
to enter service from 1975. As suggested upthread, it probably had about
four more trains than would have been needed without that extension.

If you agree that was 4 trains, then we are making progress.

With the two additional extensions to T4 and T5, more trains were moved to
the Heathrow branches, at the expense of the Rayner's Lane and,
particularly, the Uxbridge services. The Rayner's Lane branch still has a
worse service than when T4 opened, while the Uxbridge branch now gets a
more frequent Met service to compensate for the reduced Picc service. So
about four more S8 trains (which cost about £8m each) were needed to
compensate for the four more 73TS trains serving the Heathrow branches.

I'm not sure Clive agrees with you there and in any event I'm only
looking at phase 1 at the moment.

So if you want to consider the incremental fares revenue from the Heathrow
services, you need to set that against all the investments in those
services.

Yes, for phase 1 only, at the moment.

Obviously a complicating factor in doing those calculations is
that BAA contributed to the construction costs and now benefits from a
share of the fares revenue. Ideally, if the figures were available, you'd
want to include the BAA (now HAL) investments and returns as well, though
the figures may be impossible to obtain.

Incidentally, you can't just look at the Central station in isolation, as
all the trains that serve it also serve T4 or T5.

But not during phase 1.

Of course, you could produce some figures for all three phases if you
like, that would make a change from doing nothing but offering wildly
over-estimated figures contesting those you've been given by myself and
Clive.
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

On 28/04/2016 17:22, Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 08:03:57 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:

the 73TS were built while the Heathrow extension was
under construction, and a large enough fleet to cover it was ordered.
Without that extension, the order would have been for a significantly
smaller fleet.


They were later modified to have more luggage space by the
doors, with fewer seats.

What was the total cost including the two separate, subsequent
extensions
for T4 and T5, the latter also requiring a new grade-separated
underground
junction for the T4 and T5 lines to the west of the T123 station?
Those
extensions would certainly have much more than doubled the total cost.

And generate double the fares.

Probably not double (have you seen how few people use the T4
station?), but
more certainly.

Latest annual station usage stats:

T123 7.49m
T5 3.90m
T4 2.35m


Is that it? Any ideas about the Hex and Connect? Given the number of
passengers through Heathrow each year, let alone staff, those numbers
seem terribly low.

Seems Shadwell is busier than T4....

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

On 28/04/2016 20:52, Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In message , Someone Somewhere
wrote:
Who says that we're getting equivalent value on each different piece
of work? Anecdotally the cost of building railways seems to be going up,

Modern Railways used to use a "Ford Factor" of pi for increases since
privatisation. Some recent issues were using a "carton of milk"
comparison, but I forget the actual numbers.


I get the Pi thing (3.14whatever), but a carton of milk? Any chance of
a potted explanation?

and that's before you take into account the stupidly over-engineered
stations and so on of the JLE.

Why are you assuming they are over-engineered? They're mostly built in
very different ground to the Blue Clay. I remember reading at the time
that the "big box" design used at some stations was actually the
cheapest way to build them.

I'm sure it's been stated elsewhere, but I fail to believe that it's the
case for all the stations - I thought there was a lot of discussion at
the time about over-engineering? Let alone the re-signalling cost when
it didn't work etc. Even wikipedia states that the stations include:
"an attempt to "future-proof" stations by designing from the start for a
high use. One consequence is that most platforms and halls are full only
in a busy rush hour."

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 08:21:42 on Fri, 29 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-sept
ember.org, at 21:37:39 on Thu, 28 Apr 2016, Recliner
remarked:
As I said, 3/4 trains is an underestimate. It's more like six. You seem
to have forgotten T5, which usually has two trains in the station or
sidings, and T4, which always has a train in the station or loop.

Do at least *try* to keep up - Clive was talking about the order of 73's
for phase 1.

If you'd actually read my note, you'd have seen that I pointed out that
several more trains have been moved to the Heathrow branches, at the
expense of the Picc service to Uxbridge. Instead, more Met trains serve
Uxbridge.

When did this happen? The time period under discussion is late 70's.

We're not just talking about the original 1977 extension, as that can't be
viewed in isolation.

Until you agree on the parameters for ROI for the phase 1 of the
project, it's futile to be discussing the parameters for all three
phases.

The original 73TS fleet was planned to be large enough for the original
two-station Heathrow extension, which opened just after the fleet started
to enter service from 1975. As suggested upthread, it probably had about
four more trains than would have been needed without that extension.

If you agree that was 4 trains, then we are making progress.

I never disagreed about the number of trains needed prior to 1986. But that
was a small part of the eventual Heathrow extension.


With the two additional extensions to T4 and T5, more trains were moved to
the Heathrow branches, at the expense of the Rayner's Lane and,
particularly, the Uxbridge services. The Rayner's Lane branch still has a
worse service than when T4 opened, while the Uxbridge branch now gets a
more frequent Met service to compensate for the reduced Picc service. So
about four more S8 trains (which cost about £8m each) were needed to
compensate for the four more 73TS trains serving the Heathrow branches.

I'm not sure Clive agrees with you there and in any event I'm only
looking at phase 1 at the moment.

So if you want to consider the incremental fares revenue from the Heathrow
services, you need to set that against all the investments in those
services.

Yes, for phase 1 only, at the moment.

Obviously a complicating factor in doing those calculations is
that BAA contributed to the construction costs and now benefits from a
share of the fares revenue. Ideally, if the figures were available, you'd
want to include the BAA (now HAL) investments and returns as well, though
the figures may be impossible to obtain.

Incidentally, you can't just look at the Central station in isolation, as
all the trains that serve it also serve T4 or T5.

But not during phase 1.

Of course, you could produce some figures for all three phases if you
like, that would make a change from doing nothing but offering wildly
over-estimated figures contesting those you've been given by myself and
Clive.

If you only want to look at phase 1, fair enough. The analysis will have to
be for the period from 1977 to 1986, when T4 opened. What was the rate of
return, positive or negative, on the capital investments in the extended
line, stations (two all-new and one re-built) and four extra trains, made
over those ten years?

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message , at 09:56:12 on Fri, 29 Apr
2016, Someone Somewhere remarked:
Who says that we're getting equivalent value on each different piece
of work? Anecdotally the cost of building railways seems to be going up,

Modern Railways used to use a "Ford Factor" of pi for increases since
privatisation. Some recent issues were using a "carton of milk"
comparison, but I forget the actual numbers.

I get the Pi thing (3.14whatever), but a carton of milk? Any chance of
a potted explanation?

Back in the day people often used "the price of a Mars Bar" as an
inflation benchmark, but that got spolit when they kept changing the
size. Milk is an especially poor benchmark due the combination of over
production, supermarkets both screwing their suppliers and selling milk
as a loss leader.
--
Roland Perry

Heathrow runway will create £16bn burden for TfL
 

In message , at 09:43:18 on Fri, 29 Apr
2016, Someone Somewhere remarked:
Latest annual station usage stats:

T123 7.49m
T5 3.90m
T4 2.35m

Is that it? Any ideas about the Hex and Connect?

If only there was a way to find things like that out. Hold on, I'll see
if Tim Berners Lee has any ideas.

Given the number of passengers through Heathrow each year, let alone
staff, those numbers seem terribly low.

HEx is 5.84m a year and Connect a lowly 0.4m .

There is expected to be a sizeable shift from the Piccadilly Line to
Crossrail when it opens.

The airport had 73m passengers in 2014, but 26m were transfers, so 47m
landside. T5 is by far the busiest, with twice as many as the next
busiest (T3).

Overall, 40% are reported to use public transport, which sounds about
right - adding up the figures above actually gives 42%, but there's also
bus and coaches, offset from that some of the passengers are staff (but
with unsocial hours, over 17,500 free staff car parking spaces on site
and a vigorous car-sharing policy, their use of public transport is
naturally going to be low).
--
Roland Perry