On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:57:14AM +0100, tim... wrote:

but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business
at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they
rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable

I suppose it's also unreasonable that people who have no business with
Crossrail are suffering years of disruption while that is built?

--
David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic

Anyone willing to give up a little fun for tolerance deserves neither

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 08:09:04AM +0100, Basil Jet wrote:

I suspect they'll build a temporary road either side of the motorway,
divert the traffic onto that and then dig down and build a roof where
the old carriageway was. There'll probably be a 50 mph limit for a year
while the temporary road is being used.

A 50mph limit? Horrors! Why, that's the same speed that that part of the
motorway normally runs at!

--
David Cantrell | Official London Perl Mongers Bad Influence

engineer: n. one who, regardless of how much effort he puts in
to a job, will never satisfy either the suits or the scientists

On 20/06/2019 10:48, David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 08:09:04AM +0100, Basil Jet wrote:

I suspect they'll build a temporary road either side of the motorway,
divert the traffic onto that and then dig down and build a roof where
the old carriageway was. There'll probably be a 50 mph limit for a year
while the temporary road is being used.

A 50mph limit? Horrors! Why, that's the same speed that that part of the
motorway normally runs at!


In your dreams!

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 10:42:18 +0100, David Cantrell
wrote:

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:57:14AM +0100, tim... wrote:

but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business
at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they
rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable

I suppose it's also unreasonable that people who have no business with
Crossrail are suffering years of disruption while that is built?

Ditto with HS2

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001


well I don't know about the rest,

but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or
no
business
at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption
whilst
they
rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable

Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption?
It's
more
likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions.

they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from
the
way
it's described not by building a raft on top of it)

how can that not cause major disruption?


You've obviously not looked at the map,

what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see
it
(You
can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article
included
a
link)

or read this thread.

as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult

If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged
motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current
M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights.

The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that
it
wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction.

Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new
diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly
a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete
closure while the traffic is switched to the new route).

If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by
only
diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do
this

IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the
full
term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new
road
for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it?

They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures
to
the west — why would they?

because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they


Of course not.

Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like
that?

I've looked at the map

there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the
current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it

and once you access it via the motorway you are into the realms of closing
lanes

"David Cantrell" wrote in message
k...
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:57:14AM +0100, tim... wrote:

but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no
business
at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst
they
rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable

I suppose it's also unreasonable that people who have no business with
Crossrail are suffering years of disruption while that is built?

Yup

tim

On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:20:35 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001


well I don't know about the rest,

but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or
no
business
at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption
whilst
they
rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable

Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption?
It's
more
likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions.

they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from
the
way
it's described not by building a raft on top of it)

how can that not cause major disruption?


You've obviously not looked at the map,

what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see
it
(You
can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article
included
a
link)

or read this thread.

as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult

If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged
motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current
M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights.

The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that
it
wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction.

Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new
diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly
a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete
closure while the traffic is switched to the new route).

If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by
only
diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do
this

IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the
full
term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new
road
for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it?

They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures
to
the west — why would they?

because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they


Of course not.

Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like
that?

I've looked at the map

there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the
current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it

Huh? What about the A4 Colnbrook By-pass and Bath Road?

There's also rail access, which will probably play a big role.


and once you access it via the motorway you are into the realms of closing
lanes

Yes, but you've given no credible reason for why access via the M25
would be needed.

On 20/06/2019 12:47, Recliner wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:20:35 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001


well I don't know about the rest,

but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or
no
business
at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption
whilst
they
rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable

Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption?
It's
more
likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions.

they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from
the
way
it's described not by building a raft on top of it)

how can that not cause major disruption?


You've obviously not looked at the map,

what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see
it
(You
can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article
included
a
link)

or read this thread.

as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult

If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged
motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current
M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights.

The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that
it
wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction.

Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new
diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly
a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete
closure while the traffic is switched to the new route).

If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by
only
diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do
this

IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the
full
term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new
road
for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it?

They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures
to
the west — why would they?

because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they


Of course not.

Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like
that?

I've looked at the map

there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the
current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it

Huh? What about the A4 Colnbrook By-pass and Bath Road?

There's also rail access, which will probably play a big role.

They are talking about using the rail line for bringing materials in.

Looking at the more detailed plans they have problems with not only J15
(M4) but J14A (T5). There isn't space between the latter and the
proposed tunnel mouth for the appropriate weaving space and the Highways
Agency don't want weaving in the tunnel itself. Any major work on J14A
is A) going to cost a lot and B) cause major disruption on the M25. A
cursory read through the documentation doesn't really show how they are
going to square that circle.

The map we've been referring to is variation 3B, v1 being just lower the
motorway or raise the runway keeping the present alignment. Non-starter
for many reasons. 3B has around 7 subvariants depending on various
tweaks to the two interchanges, J14A and J15.

Anyone hunting out the documentation it's Structure Plan Vol2 Ch1,
there's around a dozen volumes on ecological impact first. I couldn't
find a proper index to the contents, the full colour A3 executive
summary is not actually very helpful. I get the impression it is just
there to look pretty for those who can't face 30 odd white A4 ring binders.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 20/06/2019 12:47, Recliner wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:20:35 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001


well I don't know about the rest,

but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or
no
business
at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption
whilst
they
rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable

Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption?
It's
more
likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions.

they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from
the
way
it's described not by building a raft on top of it)

how can that not cause major disruption?


You've obviously not looked at the map,

what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see
it
(You
can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article
included
a
link)

or read this thread.

as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult

If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged
motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current
M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights.

The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that
it
wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction.

Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new
diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly
a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete
closure while the traffic is switched to the new route).

If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by
only
diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do
this

IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the
full
term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new
road
for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it?

They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures
to
the west — why would they?

because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they


Of course not.

Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like
that?

I've looked at the map

there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the
current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it

Huh? What about the A4 Colnbrook By-pass and Bath Road?

There's also rail access, which will probably play a big role.

They are talking about using the rail line for bringing materials in.

Looking at the more detailed plans they have problems with not only J15
(M4) but J14A (T5). There isn't space between the latter and the
proposed tunnel mouth for the appropriate weaving space and the Highways
Agency don't want weaving in the tunnel itself. Any major work on J14A
is A) going to cost a lot and B) cause major disruption on the M25. A
cursory read through the documentation doesn't really show how they are
going to square that circle.

The map we've been referring to is variation 3B, v1 being just lower the
motorway or raise the runway keeping the present alignment. Non-starter
for many reasons. 3B has around 7 subvariants depending on various
tweaks to the two interchanges, J14A and J15.

Anyone hunting out the documentation it's Structure Plan Vol2 Ch1,
there's around a dozen volumes on ecological impact first. I couldn't
find a proper index to the contents, the full colour A3 executive
summary is not actually very helpful. I get the impression it is just
there to look pretty for those who can't face 30 odd white A4 ring binders.


Looking further into the future, the new runway is likely to cause a big
increase of traffic to T5, as it (and its extensions) will serve the new
runway.

So, even if the long-discussed two new western rail links are built, there
will still probably be a significant increase in road traffic to J14A. I
wonder if it might make sense for T5 to have direct links to the M4 that
don't briefly share the M25?

On 20/06/2019 16:02, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 20/06/2019 12:47, Recliner wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:20:35 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
tim... wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001


well I don't know about the rest,

but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or
no
business
at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption
whilst
they
rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable

Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption?
It's
more
likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions.

they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from
the
way
it's described not by building a raft on top of it)

how can that not cause major disruption?


You've obviously not looked at the map,

what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see
it
(You
can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article
included
a
link)

or read this thread.

as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult

If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged
motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current
M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights.

The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that
it
wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction.

Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new
diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly
a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete
closure while the traffic is switched to the new route).

If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by
only
diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do
this

IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the
full
term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new
road
for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it?

They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures
to
the west — why would they?

because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they


Of course not.

Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like
that?

I've looked at the map

there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the
current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it

Huh? What about the A4 Colnbrook By-pass and Bath Road?

There's also rail access, which will probably play a big role.

They are talking about using the rail line for bringing materials in.

Looking at the more detailed plans they have problems with not only J15
(M4) but J14A (T5). There isn't space between the latter and the
proposed tunnel mouth for the appropriate weaving space and the Highways
Agency don't want weaving in the tunnel itself. Any major work on J14A
is A) going to cost a lot and B) cause major disruption on the M25. A
cursory read through the documentation doesn't really show how they are
going to square that circle.

The map we've been referring to is variation 3B, v1 being just lower the
motorway or raise the runway keeping the present alignment. Non-starter
for many reasons. 3B has around 7 subvariants depending on various
tweaks to the two interchanges, J14A and J15.

Anyone hunting out the documentation it's Structure Plan Vol2 Ch1,
there's around a dozen volumes on ecological impact first. I couldn't
find a proper index to the contents, the full colour A3 executive
summary is not actually very helpful. I get the impression it is just
there to look pretty for those who can't face 30 odd white A4 ring binders.


Looking further into the future, the new runway is likely to cause a big
increase of traffic to T5, as it (and its extensions) will serve the new
runway.

So, even if the long-discussed two new western rail links are built, there
will still probably be a significant increase in road traffic to J14A. I
wonder if it might make sense for T5 to have direct links to the M4 that
don't briefly share the M25?


Where are they going to go with the new runway between the two? You can
get from the M4 to T5 without going on the M25 already: M4 Spur - A4 -
Stanwell Moor Rod and Western Perimeter road.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.