|
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/crossrail-hits-buffers-at-heathrow-jwrcctt60?shareToken=703895969b67292fe9096b3e8da8e f44 Extracts: The airport’s owners — a consortium of mostly foreign investment funds — want to recoup its past spending on the private train line with an “investment recovery charge” of £570 for every train that uses the track, plus extra fees of about £107 per train. Transport chiefs and the rail watchdog argue there is no justification for such a historic charge, and fear it could mean higher ticket prices. The Department for Transport reckons the extra charges would cost Crossrail £42m a year. A High Court judge is expected to rule imminently on the row after Heathrow challenged the watchdog’s decision to reject the charges. Under contingency plans drawn up by Transport for London, Crossrail trains could terminate a few miles short of the airport, with passengers forced to transfer onto other trains at a suburban station. The trains would then head back to central London, dodging the £700 fees. Called the Elizabeth line, London’s newest route was funded by taxpayers and businesses in the capital and is due to carry 200m people a year. Four Crossrail trains an hour will start running between Paddington and Heathrow from next May — though not to Terminal 5 as the Heathrow Express has an exclusive deal to run services there until 2023. … The company is believed to have identified a location near the airport where trains could be redirected back towards Paddington or continue west — though turning around trains on the Great Western line would create a huge headache on the main artery between the capital and the west of England and south Wales. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
On 21/05/2017 09:58, Recliner wrote:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/crossrail-hits-buffers-at-heathrow-jwrcctt60?shareToken=703895969b67292fe9096b3e8da8e f44 Extracts: The airport’s owners — a consortium of mostly foreign investment funds — want to recoup its past spending on the private train line with an “investment recovery charge” of £570 for every train that uses the track, plus extra fees of about £107 per train. Transport chiefs and the rail watchdog argue there is no justification for such a historic charge, and fear it could mean higher ticket prices. The Department for Transport reckons the extra charges would cost Crossrail £42m a year. A High Court judge is expected to rule imminently on the row after Heathrow challenged the watchdog’s decision to reject the charges. Under contingency plans drawn up by Transport for London, Crossrail trains could terminate a few miles short of the airport, with passengers forced to transfer onto other trains at a suburban station. The trains would then head back to central London, dodging the £700 fees. Called the Elizabeth line, London’s newest route was funded by taxpayers and businesses in the capital and is due to carry 200m people a year. Four Crossrail trains an hour will start running between Paddington and Heathrow from next May — though not to Terminal 5 as the Heathrow Express has an exclusive deal to run services there until 2023. Easy answer, charge Heathrow £1k per train for the Heathrow Express to use the new Paddington layout. But why didn't someone in the DfT pick up on this before they started building Crossrail? -- Graeme Wall This account not read. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
In message , at 10:10:48 on Sun, 21 May
2017, Graeme Wall remarked: The airport’s owners — a consortium of mostly foreign investment funds — want to recoup its past spending on the private train line with an “investment recovery charge” of £570 for every train that uses the track, plus extra fees of about £107 per train. Easy answer, charge Heathrow £1k per train for the Heathrow Express to use the new Paddington layout. They already have ongoing rights to use Paddington, the only leverage will be retribution when that ends in 2023 (HEx reportedly want to be able to run further into the core, then). But why didn't someone in the DfT pick up on this before they started building Crossrail? This has been known about all along, but I suspect that the DfT thought it could stare-down HEx when the time came. What could possibly go wrong? -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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 and Clapham Junction come to mind.
On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 2:31:45 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c...hrow-jwrcctt60 Extracts: The airport’s owners — a consortium of mostly foreign investment funds — want to recoup its past spending on the private train line with an “investment recovery charge” of £570 for every train that uses the track, plus extra fees of about £107 per train. Transport chiefs and the rail watchdog argue there is no justification for such a historic charge, and fear it could mean higher ticket prices. The Department for Transport reckons the extra charges would cost Crossrail £42m a year. A High Court judge is expected to rule imminently on the row after Heathrow challenged the watchdog’s decision to reject the charges. Under contingency plans drawn up by Transport for London, Crossrail trains could terminate a few miles short of the airport, with passengers forced to transfer onto other trains at a suburban station. The trains would then head back to central London, dodging the £700 fees. Called the Elizabeth line, London’s newest route was funded by taxpayers and businesses in the capital and is due to carry 200m people a year. Four Crossrail trains an hour will start running between Paddington and Heathrow from next May — though not to Terminal 5 as the Heathrow Express has an exclusive deal to run services there until 2023. … The company is believed to have identified a location near the airport where trains could be redirected back towards Paddington or continue west — though turning around trains on the Great Western line would create a huge headache on the main artery between the capital and the west of England and south Wales. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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. and Clapham Junction come to mind. Once an even less likely to ever happen new line, is built beyond Heathrow. On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 2:31:45 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c...-at-heathrow-j wrcctt60 Extracts: The airport’s owners — a consortium of mostly foreign investment funds — want to recoup its past spending on the private train line with an “investment recovery charge” of £570 for every train that uses the track, plus extra fees of about £107 per train. Transport chiefs and the rail watchdog argue there is no justification for such a historic charge, and fear it could mean higher ticket prices. The Department for Transport reckons the extra charges would cost Crossrail £42m a year. -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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. 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. On Sunday, May 21, 2017 at 2:31:45 PM UTC+5:30, Recliner wrote: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c...-at-heathrow-j wrcctt60 Extracts: The airport’s owners — a consortium of mostly foreign investment funds — want to recoup its past spending on the private train line with an “investment recovery charge” of £570 for every train that uses the track, plus extra fees of about £107 per train. Transport chiefs and the rail watchdog argue there is no justification for such a historic charge, and fear it could mean higher ticket prices. The Department for Transport reckons the extra charges would cost Crossrail £42m a year. -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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? |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
Roland Perry wrote:
In message -sept ember.org, at 22:35:02 on Sun, 21 May 2017, Recliner remarked: I think increased rail access will be a mandatory requirement for third runway approval. That's the only consideration which matters. In particular there are stringent atmospheric pollution and traffic congestion issues which requires them to shift people off the roads and onto trains. That's why the *only* market that HEx is designed to compete with is a cab to central London, not least because those passengers would never catch the tube. They wouldn't catch the Tube, but might well use the Elizabeth line, which makes it much more of a HEx competitor. Like HEx, it will offer 4 tph, but unlike HEx, it will go directly to useful places like the West End, City and Canary Wharf. So HAL is trying to do two things with this demand: 1. Raise Crossrail fares to Heathrow so they don't undercut HEx so much. Otherwise HEx may suffer an early demse. 2. Make enough money from Crossrail to compensate for the lost HEx revenues. Similarly, Heathrow Connect is mainly aimed at airport workers, the vast majority of whom nevertheless drive (often in shared cars). The airport does its best to deter travellers from using HC, by putting up no signs for it. Similarly, I don't think it's mentioned on Padd departure boards (I think it's shown as a H&H service). For example, this is the sign on the T4 Heathrow Connect station entrance: https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/26830662545/in/album-72157667996346665/ It only mentions HEx, which doesn't even serve that station. I wonder if HAL intends to ignore the Elizabeth line in the same way? Perhaps it will change its policy if Crossrail trains have to pay a hefty access charge? |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
On Mon, 22 May 2017 08:49:11 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote: I wonder if HAL intends to ignore the Elizabeth line in the same way? Perhaps it will change its policy if Crossrail trains have to pay a hefty access charge? Perhaps the government in the form of network rail or tfl should reciprocate in kind and massively raise access charges for HEx on the NR network and if they refuse to pay then physically disconnect the line to heathrow from the GW line. -- Spud |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
In message
-sept ember.org, at 08:49:11 on Mon, 22 May 2017, Recliner remarked: I think increased rail access will be a mandatory requirement for third runway approval. That's the only consideration which matters. In particular there are stringent atmospheric pollution and traffic congestion issues which requires them to shift people off the roads and onto trains. That's why the *only* market that HEx is designed to compete with is a cab to central London, not least because those passengers would never catch the tube. They wouldn't catch the Tube, but might well use the Elizabeth line, Not when they built HEx in the 90's they wouldn't. which makes it much more of a HEx competitor. Like HEx, it will offer 4 tph, but unlike HEx, it will go directly to useful places like the West End, City and Canary Wharf. But much slower, I expect. And will Elizabeth Line have First Class? So HAL is trying to do two things with this demand: 1. Raise Crossrail fares to Heathrow so they don't undercut HEx so much. Otherwise HEx may suffer an early demse. 2. Make enough money from Crossrail to compensate for the lost HEx revenues. In other words "just like when Heathrow Connect started". Similarly, Heathrow Connect is mainly aimed at airport workers, the vast majority of whom nevertheless drive (often in shared cars). The airport does its best to deter travellers from using HC, by putting up no signs for it. Similarly, I don't think it's mentioned on Padd departure boards (I think it's shown as a H&H service). That's because it's aimed at airport workers, who know all about it, and even get reduced fares. For example, this is the sign on the T4 Heathrow Connect station entrance: https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...um-72157667996 346665/ It only mentions HEx, which doesn't even serve that station. I wonder if HAL intends to ignore the Elizabeth line in the same way? Perhaps it will change its policy if Crossrail trains have to pay a hefty access charge? But Heathrow Connect already does. The interesting sociological experiment will be whether HAL treat the Elizabeth Line like the tube, or like HC. -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
|
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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? 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? -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
Roland Perry wrote:
In message -sept ember.org, at 08:49:11 on Mon, 22 May 2017, Recliner remarked: I think increased rail access will be a mandatory requirement for third runway approval. That's the only consideration which matters. In particular there are stringent atmospheric pollution and traffic congestion issues which requires them to shift people off the roads and onto trains. That's why the *only* market that HEx is designed to compete with is a cab to central London, not least because those passengers would never catch the tube. They wouldn't catch the Tube, but might well use the Elizabeth line, Not when they built HEx in the 90's they wouldn't. which makes it much more of a HEx competitor. Like HEx, it will offer 4 tph, but unlike HEx, it will go directly to useful places like the West End, City and Canary Wharf. But much slower, I expect. Slower to Paddington. But much faster to the places far more visitors actually want to go, such as the West End, City, Canary Wharf and the ExCel. And will Elizabeth Line have First Class? No. But I wonder how many HEx pax use First anyway? The First capacity is very limited (around 10% on average): Quote: The units have First class and Standard class accommodation: the four-car sets can accommodate up to 175 standard class passengers, with up to 239 in the five-car sets. First class accommodation is in one of the driving cars, referred to as 'DMF' (Driving-Motor-First) cars. The First class cars have two different layouts: 332002, 332004 and the five-car sets can accommodate up to 26 First class passengers, while in the other four-car sets up to 14 first class passengers can be accommodated. This is due to the checked luggage compartments installed in some DMF cars in 1999. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brit...32#Description HEx won't survive if it's left only with pax who refuse to travel standard class. So HAL is trying to do two things with this demand: 1. Raise Crossrail fares to Heathrow so they don't undercut HEx so much. Otherwise HEx may suffer an early demse. 2. Make enough money from Crossrail to compensate for the lost HEx revenues. In other words "just like when Heathrow Connect started". Crossrail is a serious HEx competitor. HC, by deliberate design, was not. Similarly, Heathrow Connect is mainly aimed at airport workers, the vast majority of whom nevertheless drive (often in shared cars). The airport does its best to deter travellers from using HC, by putting up no signs for it. Similarly, I don't think it's mentioned on Padd departure boards (I think it's shown as a H&H service). That's because it's aimed at airport workers, who know all about it, and even get reduced fares. Ordinary Londoners use it too, but most visitors don't discover it. For example, this is the sign on the T4 Heathrow Connect station entrance: https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...um-72157667996 346665/ It only mentions HEx, which doesn't even serve that station. I wonder if HAL intends to ignore the Elizabeth line in the same way? Perhaps it will change its policy if Crossrail trains have to pay a hefty access charge? But Heathrow Connect already does. No, HAL wants an increased charge for Crossrail access. That's what the argument is about. The interesting sociological experiment will be whether HAL treat the Elizabeth Line like the tube, or like HC. In what sense does it treat the Tube and HC differently now? |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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? 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? I think the unelectrified route is still there, but it's slow. And, as you say, there are no spare paths on any of the busy routes the trains would have to use. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
On Sunday, 21 May 2017 17:22:54 UTC+1, 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. 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. Given that the Mayor, TfL and DfT don't agree with the charge then trains simply will not go to Heathrow. They will depict HAL as vicious, money grabbing *******s that are trying to rip off Londoners. Now HAL may not give a damn but their public reputation is rather important in the context of expanding Heathrow and they are reliant on others, such as government, to actually support that scheme. People can change their minds. Crossrail will wholly replace Heathrow Connect from May next year with a 4 tph service. Clearly a deal is needed by then. From December 2019 the service is extended through the Crossrail core to Abbey Wood. This whole approach by HAL is a wilfull misinterpretation of their right to levy a charge so as to recover the past cost (including financing) of the tunnel link to Heathrow. That is all they are entitled to. Deciding to try to rip off the public purse is nothing short of a scandal. I sincerely hope the High Court tells them to sod off. -- Paul C via Google |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
Recliner writes:
The interesting sociological experiment will be whether HAL treat the Elizabeth Line like the tube, or like HC. In what sense does it treat the Tube and HC differently now? Oyster (at least PAYG) is not available on HC to the airport, only to Hayes & Harlington. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
|
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
In message 8737bxrr3j.fsf@einstein, at 13:52:32 on Mon, 22 May 2017,
Graham Murray remarked: The interesting sociological experiment will be whether HAL treat the Elizabeth Line like the tube, or like HC. In what sense does it treat the Tube and HC differently now? Oyster (at least PAYG) is not available on HC to the airport, only to Hayes & Harlington. That's a TfL decision, not the airport's. With the fees for using the link being fixed (see my reply to Recliner) it seems disingenuous for TfL to price gouge travellers between H&H and LHR "because they can" when the costs to TfL are the same whether or not the trains are full or empty. -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
In message 117407862.517138464.000186.recliner.ng-
, at 09:44:29 on Mon, 22 May 2017, Recliner remarked: Roland Perry wrote: In message -sept ember.org, at 08:49:11 on Mon, 22 May 2017, Recliner remarked: I think increased rail access will be a mandatory requirement for third runway approval. That's the only consideration which matters. In particular there are stringent atmospheric pollution and traffic congestion issues which requires them to shift people off the roads and onto trains. That's why the *only* market that HEx is designed to compete with is a cab to central London, not least because those passengers would never catch the tube. They wouldn't catch the Tube, but might well use the Elizabeth line, Not when they built HEx in the 90's they wouldn't. which makes it much more of a HEx competitor. Like HEx, it will offer 4 tph, but unlike HEx, it will go directly to useful places like the West End, City and Canary Wharf. But much slower, I expect. Slower to Paddington. But much faster to the places far more visitors actually want to go, such as the West End, City, Canary Wharf and the ExCel. Lots of people fly into Heathrow wanting to visit ExCel? Really?? And will Elizabeth Line have First Class? No. But I wonder how many HEx pax use First anyway? The First capacity is very limited (around 10% on average): It's an image thing - a service with First Class is perceived to be better, even if you slum it in the cheap seats. So HAL is trying to do two things with this demand: 1. Raise Crossrail fares to Heathrow so they don't undercut HEx so much. Otherwise HEx may suffer an early demse. 2. Make enough money from Crossrail to compensate for the lost HEx revenues. In other words "just like when Heathrow Connect started". Crossrail is a serious HEx competitor. HC, by deliberate design, was not. Whose design? In other news, the 570 + 107 is very similar to the existing charge for HC, which is 574 + 138, and it's actually a flat "season ticket" fee for 16tph, expressed as a per-train amount, presumably to make it more accessible to the audience. The 574 covers the amortisation of the agreed capital costs of the tracks and stations, and the 138 is the day to day running costs. see 6.1.5: http://www.heathrow.com/file_source/...mpanynewsandin formation/rail-network-statement-june15.pdf If TfL choose to run more or fewer trains, the total payable remains the same; unless they choose to run zero trains, which probably isn't politically tenable, not least because they'll be handing all the Crossrail passengers over to the mercy of HEx and Hex fares, at Paddington. Let alone walking away from the HC traffic altogether. Similarly, Heathrow Connect is mainly aimed at airport workers, the vast majority of whom nevertheless drive (often in shared cars). The airport does its best to deter travellers from using HC, by putting up no signs for it. Similarly, I don't think it's mentioned on Padd departure boards (I think it's shown as a H&H service). That's because it's aimed at airport workers, who know all about it, and even get reduced fares. Ordinary Londoners use it too, but most visitors don't discover it. Because it's aimed at airport workers; if others want to use the trains then good luck to them. For example, this is the sign on the T4 Heathrow Connect station entrance: https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...um-72157667996 346665/ It only mentions HEx, which doesn't even serve that station. I wonder if HAL intends to ignore the Elizabeth line in the same way? Perhaps it will change its policy if Crossrail trains have to pay a hefty access charge? But Heathrow Connect already does. No, HAL wants an increased charge for Crossrail access. That's what the argument is about. No increase - see above. The interesting sociological experiment will be whether HAL treat the Elizabeth Line like the tube, or like HC. In what sense does it treat the Tube and HC differently now? Signage on the concourses, we are told. -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
In message , at
04:23:34 on Mon, 22 May 2017, Paul Corfield remarked: This whole approach by HAL is a wilfull misinterpretation of their right to levy a charge so as to recover the past cost (including financing) of the tunnel link to Heathrow. That is all they are entitled to. Almost all the fee *is* recovering the past cost. They are actually proposing reducing the operating expenditure portion from 19% to 16% of the total. -- Roland Perry |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
On Mon, 22 May 2017 14:39:03 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:34:16 on Mon, 22 May 2017, d remarked: I wonder if HAL intends to ignore the Elizabeth line in the same way? Perhaps it will change its policy if Crossrail trains have to pay a hefty access charge? Perhaps the government in the form of network rail or tfl should reciprocate in kind and massively raise access charges for HEx on the NR network and if they refuse to pay then physically disconnect the line to heathrow from the GW line. They can't do that until 2023. And if they did it would give HAL a golden opportunity to say "Ha! You don't want to cut traffic and air pollution near the airport after all, do you". 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. I live under one 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? -- Spud |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
|
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
In article ,
Recliner wrote: No. But I wonder how many HEx pax use First anyway? The First capacity is very limited (around 10% on average): For a 15 minute trip, I find it hard to understand why anyone would care. The standard class is not awful, and it's not like they serve you dinner on the way. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
Would it be a fair compromise to put Heathrow (Crossrail) into a different fare zone to Heathrow (Tube)? That way you get to charge a small surcharge for using Crossrail rather than the Piccadilly line, which given the faster journey and more comfortable trains is probably reasonable.
|
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
On 22/05/2017 16:51, d wrote:
On Mon, 22 May 2017 14:39:03 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:34:16 on Mon, 22 May 2017, d remarked: I wonder if HAL intends to ignore the Elizabeth line in the same way? Perhaps it will change its policy if Crossrail trains have to pay a hefty access charge? Perhaps the government in the form of network rail or tfl should reciprocate in kind and massively raise access charges for HEx on the NR network and if they refuse to pay then physically disconnect the line to heathrow from the GW line. They can't do that until 2023. And if they did it would give HAL a golden opportunity to say "Ha! You don't want to cut traffic and air pollution near the airport after all, do you". 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. I live under one 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. -- Graeme Wall This account not read. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
Roland Perry wrote:
In message 8737bxrr3j.fsf@einstein, at 13:52:32 on Mon, 22 May 2017, Graham Murray remarked: The interesting sociological experiment will be whether HAL treat the Elizabeth Line like the tube, or like HC. In what sense does it treat the Tube and HC differently now? Oyster (at least PAYG) is not available on HC to the airport, only to Hayes & Harlington. That's a TfL decision, not the airport's. With the fees for using the link being fixed (see my reply to Recliner) it seems disingenuous for TfL to price gouge travellers between H&H and LHR "because they can" when the costs to TfL are the same whether or not the trains are full or empty. Is it a TfL or GWR/DfT decision? I don't think TfL controls HC and its Heathrow stations. But it will operate Crossrail, hence the dispute. This document is worth a read: http://www.orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/22086/charging-framework-for-the-heathrow-spur-decision-may-2016.pdf The dispute seems to revolve on whether HAL has, or could, recover the construction costs from airline charges, as the cost of building it is included in the RAB (regulated asset base). HAL is entitled to charge for rail access if it can show that it wouldn't havd built the spur without the prospect of such chatges. Also, there's a dispute over whether the original basis for the rail access charges applies to a service beyond Padd, such as Crossrail, as it's a new service that wasn't part of the original business plan. Para 78 also suggests that HAL has already fully recovered the spurs original construction costs: "In our proposed decision we also discussed that Schedule 11 of the Joint Operating Agreement contained a financial model demonstrating how the HEX service would provide a return on HAL’s investment in the Heathrow Spur. This model showed that the fare revenue to be received between 1993 and 2016 was forecast to be sufficient to cover all BAA’s initial investment in building the Heathrow Spur as well as covering operating costs for those years." |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
Steve Lewis wrote:
Would it be a fair compromise to put Heathrow (Crossrail) into a different fare zone to Heathrow (Tube)? That way you get to charge a small surcharge for using Crossrail rather than the Piccadilly line, which given the faster journey and more comfortable trains is probably reasonable. Yes, that may have to be the compromise if the HAL rail access charges can't be reduced. There is a precedent in that Watford Met and Junction are in quite different fare zones, despite being only about a mile apart. HEx will not be part of the Oyster system, so its station in T5 won't be included or gated, and Hex travel will continue to be free between T5 and T2&3. Crossrail and HEx will share platforms at T2&3, so it won't be possible to have barriers there. And the Crossrail service between T4 and T2&3 will continue to be free, so the T4 station can't be gated either. It will all be a bit complicated, with none of the three stations gated, some services free, some charged at Oyster prices, and others at premium prices. HEx users can buy tickets on board, at the station, or in advance, at very different prices. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
On 2017\05\22 10:49, Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote: 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? I think the unelectrified route is still there, but it's slow. The original curve in the vicinity of Mitre Bridge is gone, but a diversion route that passes a few yards from Willesden Junction station is available. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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? |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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. |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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 |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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 |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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 |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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 |
Crossrail access to Heathrow still not settled
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 |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:05 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk