On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 1:23:22 AM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote:
Ding Bat wrote:
If, hypothetically, the judge finds that Heathrow has the right to levy
this charge, it would be possible to charge less per train by running
more trains by adding more destinations. Heathrow Connect to Paddington
is slated to be phased out in favor of Crossrail to Paddington.

No, the 9-car, 4 tph Crossrail trains will go from Heathrow T4 to Abbey
Wood. They will replace the 5-car, 2 tph Heathrow Connect service to
Paddington.

To Paddington en route to a further destination, I mean. From Paddington, some will go on to Abbey Wood, others will go on to Shenfield and still others might take the route to Shenfield but turn back at some point before Shenfield.

Heathrow Connect could be continued as a service to Stratford rather than
Paddington; it would become the easiest way to get from Heathrow to a
number of northern suburbs by mass transit. In addition, trains could be
run from Heathrow to busy junctions - Reading and Clapham Junction come to mind.

Using what route?

Ding Bat wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 1:23:22 AM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote:
Ding Bat wrote:
If, hypothetically, the judge finds that Heathrow has the right to levy
this charge, it would be possible to charge less per train by running
more trains by adding more destinations. Heathrow Connect to Paddington
is slated to be phased out in favor of Crossrail to Paddington.

No, the 9-car, 4 tph Crossrail trains will go from Heathrow T4 to Abbey
Wood. They will replace the 5-car, 2 tph Heathrow Connect service to
Paddington.

To Paddington en route to a further destination, I mean. From Paddington,
some will go on to Abbey Wood, others will go on to Shenfield and still
others might take the route to Shenfield but turn back at some point before Shenfield.

You make it sound like there will be thousands of Crossrail trains from
Heathrow following many different routes. In reality, I believe all four
Heathrow Crossrail services per hour will go to Abbey Wood, not Shenfield.
This may be partly because of the Crossrail funding that came from Canary
Wharf.

Ding Bat wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 1:23:22 AM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote:
Ding Bat wrote:
If, hypothetically, the judge finds that Heathrow has the right to levy
this charge, it would be possible to charge less per train by running
more trains by adding more destinations. Heathrow Connect to Paddington
is slated to be phased out in favor of Crossrail to Paddington.

No, the 9-car, 4 tph Crossrail trains will go from Heathrow T4 to Abbey
Wood. They will replace the 5-car, 2 tph Heathrow Connect service to
Paddington.

Heathrow Connect could be continued as a service to Stratford rather than
Paddington; it would become the easiest way to get from Heathrow to a
number of northern suburbs by mass transit. In addition, trains could be
run from Heathrow to busy junctions - Reading and Clapham Junction come to mind.

Using what route?

Currently, Heathrow passes Ealing and goes on to Paddington. If it passes
Ealing and goes on to Willesden Junction by switching to the Overground,
it could get to Stratford.

Why go by such a convoluted, slow route, with a 5-car platform limit (when
Crossrail trains are twice as long), when one branch of Crossrail goes
directly to Stratford anyway?

An interchange between Crossrail, HS2 and LO is planned at OOC.

On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 3:03:07 PM UTC+5:30, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
11:37:52 on Sun, 21 May 2017, Ding Bat
remarked:
On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 11:07:19 PM UTC+5:30, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
09:22:54 on Sun, 21 May 2017, Ding Bat
remarked:
If, hypothetically, the judge finds that Heathrow has the right to levy
this charge, it would be possible to charge less per train by running
more trains by adding more destinations. Heathrow Connect to Paddington
is slated to be phased out in favor of Crossrail to Paddington.
Heathrow Connect could be continued as a service to Stratford rather
than Paddington; it would become the easiest way to get from Heathrow
to a number of northern suburbs by mass transit. In addition, trains
could be run from Heathrow to busy junctions - Reading

Once a new line is built beyond Heathrow.

What new line? The same line that takes Heathrow Express to Paddington can be
used to go to Reading. Trains would just have to turn west toward
Reading instead instead of east toward Paddington.

Across a lake and through the middle of a warehouse. What could possibly
go wrong?

It would require some construction. To the east of Heathpark Golf Course, the railroad is in a tunnel. The tunnel would have to be forked and the fork routed to some point before West Drayton station, so that there can be trains from Heathrow to Reading and points beyond. For comparison, there are trains from Frankfurt airport to cities other than Frankfurt.

and Clapham Junction come to mind.

Once an even less likely to ever happen new line, is built beyond
Heathrow.

Why a new line? The line to Paddington crosses the London Overground line
that goes to Clapham Junction. If there's no switch to turn south toward
Clapham Junction, that can be added.

Back in the day there was a loop around Old Oak Common, used by XC
trains to/from Brighton. Even if reinstated, where are you going to get
the extra paths from between Heathrow Junction and Acton?

If some trains from Reading (or Bristol) to Paddington are routed to Heathrow instead, that would free up capacity.

Ding Bat wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 3:03:07 PM UTC+5:30, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
11:37:52 on Sun, 21 May 2017, Ding Bat
remarked:
On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 11:07:19 PM UTC+5:30, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
09:22:54 on Sun, 21 May 2017, Ding Bat
remarked:
If, hypothetically, the judge finds that Heathrow has the right to levy
this charge, it would be possible to charge less per train by running
more trains by adding more destinations. Heathrow Connect to Paddington
is slated to be phased out in favor of Crossrail to Paddington.
Heathrow Connect could be continued as a service to Stratford rather
than Paddington; it would become the easiest way to get from Heathrow
to a number of northern suburbs by mass transit. In addition, trains
could be run from Heathrow to busy junctions - Reading

Once a new line is built beyond Heathrow.

What new line? The same line that takes Heathrow Express to Paddington can be
used to go to Reading. Trains would just have to turn west toward
Reading instead instead of east toward Paddington.

Across a lake and through the middle of a warehouse. What could possibly
go wrong?

It would require some construction. To the east of Heathpark Golf Course,
the railroad is in a tunnel. The tunnel would have to be forked and the
fork routed to some point before West Drayton station, so that there can
be trains from Heathrow to Reading and points beyond.

What's the point of this idea when the *much* more useful Western Rail Link
is underway?

For comparison, there are trains from Frankfurt airport to cities other than Frankfurt.

That's because the airport station is on the main line. The same is true of
Birmingham, Gatwick and Luton.


and Clapham Junction come to mind.

Once an even less likely to ever happen new line, is built beyond
Heathrow.

Why a new line? The line to Paddington crosses the London Overground line
that goes to Clapham Junction. If there's no switch to turn south toward
Clapham Junction, that can be added.

Back in the day there was a loop around Old Oak Common, used by XC
trains to/from Brighton. Even if reinstated, where are you going to get
the extra paths from between Heathrow Junction and Acton?

If some trains from Reading (or Bristol) to Paddington are routed to
Heathrow instead, that would free up capacity.

The airport spur will have 8 tph in each direction, leaving little or no
spare capacity at the termini. The Western Rail Link is a much better
solution.

In message , at
17:16:43 on Mon, 22 May 2017, Ding Bat
remarked:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 3:03:07 PM UTC+5:30, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
11:37:52 on Sun, 21 May 2017, Ding Bat
remarked:
On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 11:07:19 PM UTC+5:30, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at
09:22:54 on Sun, 21 May 2017, Ding Bat
remarked:
If, hypothetically, the judge finds that Heathrow has the right to levy
this charge, it would be possible to charge less per train by running
more trains by adding more destinations. Heathrow Connect to Paddington
is slated to be phased out in favor of Crossrail to Paddington.
Heathrow Connect could be continued as a service to Stratford rather
than Paddington; it would become the easiest way to get from Heathrow
to a number of northern suburbs by mass transit. In addition, trains
could be run from Heathrow to busy junctions - Reading

Once a new line is built beyond Heathrow.

What new line? The same line that takes Heathrow Express to
Paddington can be
used to go to Reading. Trains would just have to turn west toward
Reading instead instead of east toward Paddington.

Across a lake and through the middle of a warehouse. What could possibly
go wrong?

It would require some construction.

If construction is allowed in this pipe-dream, then the plan is to
extend the line through Terminal 5 towards Slough.

To the east of Heathpark Golf Course, the railroad is in a tunnel. The
tunnel would have to be forked and the fork routed to some point before
West Drayton station, so that there can be trains from Heathrow to
Reading and points beyond.

"Expensive construction" even.

For comparison, there are trains from Frankfurt airport to cities other
than Frankfurt.

What does that have to do with anything?

and Clapham Junction come to mind.

Once an even less likely to ever happen new line, is built beyond
Heathrow.

Why a new line? The line to Paddington crosses the London Overground line
that goes to Clapham Junction. If there's no switch to turn south toward
Clapham Junction, that can be added.

Back in the day there was a loop around Old Oak Common, used by XC
trains to/from Brighton. Even if reinstated, where are you going to get
the extra paths from between Heathrow Junction and Acton?

If some trains from Reading (or Bristol) to Paddington are routed to
Heathrow instead, that would free up capacity.

And reduce the service to London from such places. That wouldn't be very
popular.
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 22 May 2017 17:06:28 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:51:16 on Mon, 22 May
2017, d remarked:
Given their lobbying for a 3rd runway I think its fair to say heathrow don't
have a leg to stand on wrt enviroment concerns. And airliner on takeoff
burns
the same amount of fuel per second as a couple of thousand cars.

That's a different aspect to the environmental impact. The ones the
NIMBYs worry about include traffic congestion and pollution from road
vehicles.

Worring about the wolf while not noticing the bear. I'd have thought a 2
mile long slab of concrete plus god knows how many jets taking off overhead
would have been a lot more to worry about than extra traffic.

There's a large five figure number of employees and about the same
number of passengers, every day. That's an awfully big impact on the
local roads and pollution.

Sure, I'm not saying the road traffic won't be worse. But tbh one traffic
jam is very much like another. When I worked down there it was pretty much
gridlock already in the rush hour. However that only affects a relatively
small area. The extra flights will affect all of london and a significant
portion of Berkshire. All so Heathrow Plc can increase its share price.

--
Spud

On Tuesday, 23 May 2017 00:43:20 UTC+1, Ding Bat wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 1:23:22 AM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote:
Ding Bat wrote:
If, hypothetically, the judge finds that Heathrow has the right to levy
this charge, it would be possible to charge less per train by running
more trains by adding more destinations. Heathrow Connect to Paddington
is slated to be phased out in favor of Crossrail to Paddington.

No, the 9-car, 4 tph Crossrail trains will go from Heathrow T4 to Abbey
Wood. They will replace the 5-car, 2 tph Heathrow Connect service to
Paddington.

To Paddington en route to a further destination, I mean. From Paddington, some will go on to Abbey Wood, others will go on to Shenfield and still others might take the route to Shenfield but turn back at some point before Shenfield.

Heathrow Connect could be continued as a service to Stratford rather than
Paddington; it would become the easiest way to get from Heathrow to a
number of northern suburbs by mass transit. In addition, trains could be
run from Heathrow to busy junctions - Reading and Clapham Junction come to mind.

Using what route?

Heathrow Connect ceases to exist in May 2018. the Crossrail TOC takes over the service. There will be no spare paths for trains to go anywhere else. The rolling stock will presumably go off lease as new class 345s will take over.

TfL have published details of the planned Crossrail service pattern. Heathrow trains will run directly to Abbey Wood. That is the proposed service pattern. The only exceptions will be at the start and end of the peaks and possibly early morning or late night where the service pattern may vary in order to get trains back to / from depots. There will be NO regular service to / from the Shenfield route to / from Heathrow. Shenfield route trains will run to Paddington / West Drayton / Reading.

--
Paul C
via Google

On Mon, 22 May 2017 21:14:01 +0100
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 22/05/2017 16:51, d wrote:
of the many heathrow flight paths and there's enough air traffic already. God
knows what it'll be like with even more. Assuming NATs can handle it which
isn't a given as it seems from 2019 they'll be doing London Citys remote
control tower - no one at home, just video feeds down a presumably "secure"
link. What could possibly go wrong?


Actually three separate secure links.

And how do you know the current one in use hasn't been compromised and is
feeding duff data or video? Or failing that a contractor cuts through the
cables by mistake. I utterly fail to see the logic behind this. It must be
costing a fortune to do and for what? They won't be saving on salaries since
they'll still need new people at NATs so what is the reason? Heating bill of
the control tower? Given the risks its an absurd decision.

--
Spud

In message , at 08:44:54 on Tue, 23 May
2017, d remarked:
On Mon, 22 May 2017 17:06:28 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:51:16 on Mon, 22 May
2017, d remarked:
Given their lobbying for a 3rd runway I think its fair to say
heathrow don't
have a leg to stand on wrt enviroment concerns. And airliner on takeoff
burns
the same amount of fuel per second as a couple of thousand cars.

That's a different aspect to the environmental impact. The ones the
NIMBYs worry about include traffic congestion and pollution from road
vehicles.

Worring about the wolf while not noticing the bear. I'd have thought a 2
mile long slab of concrete plus god knows how many jets taking off overhead
would have been a lot more to worry about than extra traffic.

There's a large five figure number of employees and about the same
number of passengers, every day. That's an awfully big impact on the
local roads and pollution.

Sure, I'm not saying the road traffic won't be worse. But tbh one traffic
jam is very much like another. When I worked down there it was pretty much
gridlock already in the rush hour.

If the airport wasn't there, the traffic congestion and pollution would
be much worse.

We are where we are, and the improvements to public transport are mainly
to reduce the traffic and pollution.

--
Roland Perry