On 20/06/2016 21:48, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:35:37 on Mon, 20 Jun
2016, Basil Jet remarked:
I think they should just build a dedicated walkway with a travelator

Luton Airport to the station is about 1.2 miles, which is similar to
the distance from Marble Arch station to Tottenham Court Road station.
i.e. three tube stops.

The travelator at Montparnasse is one of the longest I've seen, but
still only 180m. But the problem with Luton is it would be substantially
uphill too.

Substantially uphill you say? You know what would be good for that?
Yep - a skilift - pity dangleways near airports aren't a particularly
good idea.

You could pair it with some kind of sled run downhill for ultimate
arrivals fun!

"Basil Jet" wrote in message
...
On 2016\06\20 21:56, tim... wrote:

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 21:35:37 on Mon, 20 Jun
2016, Basil Jet remarked:
I think they should just build a dedicated walkway with a travelator

Luton Airport to the station is about 1.2 miles, which is similar to
the distance from Marble Arch station to Tottenham Court Road
station. i.e. three tube stops.

The travelator at Montparnasse is one of the longest I've seen, but
still only 180m. But the problem with Luton is it would be
substantially uphill too.

If you disembark at one of the remote hubs at LHR the "walk" to passport
control is the best part of a mile

I did it several times on my last overseas gig and on one occasion times
the walk to see how long it was.

There are a series of travelators to make the journey easier. I wasn't
suggesting a single mile-long travelator

Even if it's in sections, you still have a mile-worth of vehicle
continuously moving slowly, even though the trains from London only arrive
at the station every fifteen minutes or so. There must be multiple ways to
provide quick journeys for heavily peaked demand more cheaply with a
(mostly) narrower footprint.

I think you over-estimate the quantity of arrivals at the station

When I last went there (three weeks ago) -

I got out of the station (midday) to see a bus waiting, it already had some
people on it

We waited there for about 7-8 minutes whilst they sorted out all of the
passengers who didn't have tickets, but it was still not full when we left.
(IIRC there was also a southbound arrival whilst I waited)

Coming back it was during the 5pm rush hour and the buses were delayed due
to normal home from work congestion and there wasn't a bus at the stop.

There was already a huddle of people waiting.

It was about 3-4 minutes before the bus arrived, it took 2 minutes to empty
arriving pax, then we all crowded on and the bus left - again a total wait
of about 8 minutes for one full bus load.

So 8 buses per hour, 80 pax per bus = 640 pax per hour.

is 10 people per minute.

Not a huge number, is it?

I know that they arrive at the station (and the airport) in waves, but ISTM
that wave will flatten itself out due to the normal differences that people
have in walking time (with their luggage) from the platform to the start of
the walkway.

tim

On 13/06/2016 21:30, wrote:
In article ,
(e27002 aurora) wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 12:15:42 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 2016\06\13 10:07, solar penguin wrote:
On Monday, 13 June 2016 08:59:16 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:

e27002 wrote:

It was deceptive to say the least. One wonders how long it will take
Borough of Croydon, and the Royal Borough Kingston-Upon-Thames to
realize that they would be better off as unitary authorities outwith
the GLA monolith.

Yes, I'm sure that losing their Freedom Passes would be really popular
among the residents of those boroughs! No doubt, higher tram fares
would also raise a cheer. But I wonder why you cite Croydon, which
does have TfL services, rather than Bromley and Bexley, which don't?

Just to be pedantic: Bromley has TfL London Overground services from
3 stations in the borough.

All boroughs have TfL railways to Central London except

* Sutton, which has trams
* Kingston, which has nothing
* Bexley, which is getting Crossrail at Abbey Wood soon

So the Royal Borough benefits very little from the council taxes and
business rates it contributes to the GLA. A bit like the UK in the EU
really. :-)

More Brexit lies I see. The UK benefits about 10 times what it pays in to
the EU. Or weren't you listening to Radio 4 at noon today?

In that case, shouldn't we increase our "contributions" by a factor of
(at least) ten?

Someone seems to have found the secret of the magic money tree.

In message , at 10:02:16 on Tue, 21 Jun
2016, tim... remarked:

10 people per minute.

Not a huge number, is it?

I know that they arrive at the station (and the airport) in waves, but
ISTM that wave will flatten itself out due to the normal differences
that people have in walking time (with their luggage) from the platform
to the start of the walkway.

It's far too small a number to justify a project as ambitious as you
suggest.
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 10:05:57 +0100
JNugent wrote:
On 13/06/2016 21:30, wrote:
More Brexit lies I see. The UK benefits about 10 times what it pays in to
the EU. Or weren't you listening to Radio 4 at noon today?

In that case, shouldn't we increase our "contributions" by a factor of
(at least) ten?

Someone seems to have found the secret of the magic money tree.

I notice he didn't provide any figures showing how we get 10 times more money
back than we put in. No doubt he's probably refering to some nebulous benefit
of immigration here with some pluck-it-out-of-his-backside contribution to
the economy, conveniently forgetting that if we needed immigrants to fill jobs
they'd be let in regardless of EU rules or not.

--
Spud

On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:17:00 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 17/06/2016 12:32, wrote:

And moderate your language, please. Intemperance like yours is what is
really damaging this country.

Pot. Kettle. Black. From the man who called me an idiot no more than a
couple of weeks back.

Thats the least of it. You should google him. Makes interesting reading.

--
Spud

On 21/06/2016 11:07, d wrote:
On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 09:17:00 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 17/06/2016 12:32, wrote:

And moderate your language, please. Intemperance like yours is what is
really damaging this country.

Pot. Kettle. Black. From the man who called me an idiot no more than a
couple of weeks back.

Thats the least of it. You should google him. Makes interesting reading.


Indeed - I've been here a while on and off (my first contributions to
usenet were way back in 1995) and am well aware of his previous form.

I was actually letting things in the somewhat distant past lie, but
thought it was somewhat hypocritical given his minor outburst at me the
other week.

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 01:46:44PM +0000, d wrote:

Both Luton and Gatwick are miles out of London with arguably dodgy rail and
crowded motorway links, yet they're both very popular. There has to be more
to it than location and the train.

Dunno about Luton, but Gatwick has a very good train service. At least
when Southern aren't playing silly buggers. Just this hour as I write
this, there are trains to London scheduled at ...

12:07, 10, 15, 26, 30, 33, 37, 38, 40, 45, 52, 53, 56

The journey takes about 30 minutes to Victoria or London Bridge, 55
minutes to St Pancras. Even at Ridiculous O'Clock in the morning there
are three trains an hour

And I've always found the M23 to Just Work.

--
David Cantrell | Official London Perl Mongers Bad Influence

Irregular English:
you have anecdotes; they have data; I have proof

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 06:38:39PM +0100, tim... wrote:

so what, 4 airlines flying to LHR, plus various options options via other
airports looks like enough competition to me

"Enough competition" looks like a cosy little cartel to me. Erecting
artificial barriers to new entrants into the market is just a terrible
idea.

Imagine if we were talking about breweries instead. "4 breweries selling
to pubs in London, plus some foreign imports, looks like enough
competition to me".

--
David Cantrell | Cake Smuggler Extraordinaire

You are so cynical. And by "cynical", of course, I mean "correct".
-- Kurt Starsinic

On 15/06/2016 15:15, d wrote:

Roland Perry wrote:
2016, d remarked:

If all fares originating in the UK go up, then competitively it's still
a level playing field for the airlines, but the passengers all pay more.

Air fares going up can only be a good thing. There are far too many aircraft
in the skies already mostly flying people on pointless trips. Only a small
minority are actually for business.

It's a minority at Heathrow (36%) but that small of one.

The amount of pollution from aircraft, both noise and CO2 is
horrendous.

Nanny knows best, eh?

Oh, you don't think its a problem then?

What - a problem that people can afford to travel for pleasure?

And without your permission?

What a problem.