From the Independent:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/tra...p?story=571591

High-speed commuter rail scheme delayed by a year
By Barrie Clement, Transport Editor
13 October 2004

A £300m project to establish Britain's first super-fast commuter rail
service will be delayed by at least a year amid concern that it could be a
hugely expensive "white elephant", The Independent understands.

The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations in Kent
to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are still
arguing over which rolling stock to order.

Industry sources assert that there is "not a cat in hell's chance" of the
new trains being ready on time - a prediction privately acknowledged by
Whitehall officials.

The Department for Transport has registered its dismay about the price of
the new rolling stock, which has to be specially built to cope with the
different electrification systems on the domestic and CTRL tracks. It is
known that the cost of the 18 "sets" - locomotive and carriages - could be
£200m. However, it is possible that more sets will be required, taking the
final price tag, together with other costs, to £300m.

Some government officials are also worried that the new services may fail to
attract sufficient commuters.

While a new station at Ebbsfleet, Gravesend, is expected to be popular with
passengers because of its proximity to the A2 and the M25, there is a
question-mark over other stations further away from the capital.

The new trains would operate on three main routes. One of the new services
is scheduled to start at Folkestone and another at Ramsgate. They will both
then join the CTRL at Ashford International. From there they go via
Ebbsfleet under the Thames to Stratford and on into London. Another is
supposed to begin at Sittingbourne, run through the Medway towns then on to
the CTRL at Ebbsfleet. They will all terminate at St Pancras.

It is thought that the only way of guaranteeing full trains would be by
keeping the cost of tickets down. Ministers still hope that a premium rate
can be charged for the super-fast services, possibly double the rate paid on
comparable routes on the far slower suburban network.

Transport for London, which is responsible for networks in the capital,
points out that part of the cost for the new super-fast services will be met
by axing rush-hour trains using the existing lines.

One source close to the rolling stock companies that will buy the trains and
lease them to the train operator said that while the project was a
"financial basket case", the Government seemed politically committed to it.

On the existing domestic railway the fastest time between Gravesend and
Charing Cross is 52 minutes. The new services would take about 15 minutes to
get from Ebbsfleet to a newly enlarged St Pancras.

In a recent letter to the Prime Minister, Sir Sandy Bruce-Lockhart, leader
of Kent County Council, argued that the development of the new links was
essential to the Government's plans for the development of the so-called
Thames Gateway, which runs through north Kent to the coast.

Sir Sandy called on Tony Blair, who has taken over the chairmanship of the
cabinet sub-committee dealing with the development area, to "unlock the
inertia" surrounding the high speed links.

The Strategic Rail Authority (SRA), which took over responsibility from
Connex for the ailing rail services in Kent, hopes to "re-privatise" the
franchise next year. The new incumbent will be responsible for running the
fast commuter services as well as existing routes.

A spokesman for the SRA said that officials were working with the Department
for Transport to get services started "as soon as possible".

"Angus Bryant" wrote in message ...
From the Independent:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/tra...p?story=571591

High-speed commuter rail scheme delayed by a year
By Barrie Clement, Transport Editor
13 October 2004

A £300m project to establish Britain's first super-fast commuter rail
service will be delayed by at least a year amid concern that it could be a
hugely expensive "white elephant", The Independent understands.

What a surprise!

The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations in Kent
to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are still
arguing over which rolling stock to order.

Over engineered trains again. Would it not be eaiser to use the line
at 160mph and add 5 minutes to the London Paris journey time?

Industry sources assert that there is "not a cat in hell's chance" of the
new trains being ready on time - a prediction privately acknowledged by
Whitehall officials.

The Department for Transport has registered its dismay about the price of
the new rolling stock, which has to be specially built to cope with the
different electrification systems on the domestic and CTRL tracks. It is
known that the cost of the 18 "sets" - locomotive and carriages - could be
£200m. However, it is possible that more sets will be required, taking the
final price tag, together with other costs, to £300m.

I've heard each set is six carriages = £1.8 - 2.7 million per
carriage, compared with £1 million for the new South East Trains.

Some government officials are also worried that the new services may fail to
attract sufficient commuters.

With expansion in Ashford and Medway they'll have enough. Especially
if they're only six carriages.

While a new station at Ebbsfleet, Gravesend, is expected to be popular with
passengers because of its proximity to the A2 and the M25, there is a
question-mark over other stations further away from the capital.

The new trains would operate on three main routes. One of the new services
is scheduled to start at Folkestone and another at Ramsgate. They will both
then join the CTRL at Ashford International.

Anyone know if they plan the join the units at Ashford?

From there they go via
Ebbsfleet under the Thames to Stratford and on into London. Another is
supposed to begin at Sittingbourne, run through the Medway towns then on to
the CTRL at Ebbsfleet. They will all terminate at St Pancras.

It is thought that the only way of guaranteeing full trains would be by
keeping the cost of tickets down. Ministers still hope that a premium rate
can be charged for the super-fast services, possibly double the rate paid on
comparable routes on the far slower suburban network.

So after paying standard rates for the slowest trains in England
(Europe?) they're expected to pay extra for the fastest. Double the
rate would be inaffordable for too many commuters - how mnany people
commute on the Heathrow Express?

"Alex Terrell" wrote in message
om...
The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations in
Kent
to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are
still
arguing over which rolling stock to order.

Over engineered trains again. Would it not be eaiser to use the line
at 160mph and add 5 minutes to the London Paris journey time?


It would be even easier to run it at 90mph and use MK1 EMUs (lots of them
going spare now), but that would be missing the point of the line, wouldn't
it?

(Alex Terrell) wrote in message . com...
"Angus Bryant" wrote in message ...
From the Independent:
snippity snip
The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations in Kent
to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are still
arguing over which rolling stock to order.

Over engineered trains again. Would it not be eaiser to use the line
at 160mph and add 5 minutes to the London Paris journey time?

I thought the CTRL DS trains were only supposed to be running at
140mph?

Would it not be cheaper to upgrade the max 100 miles of track to the
overhead wires system that's used on the CTRL? Then the trains
wouldn't have to be so versatile...

"Richard Thomas" wrote in message
om...
(Alex Terrell) wrote in message
. com...
"Angus Bryant" wrote in message
...
From the Independent:
snippity snip
The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations
in Kent
to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are
still
arguing over which rolling stock to order.

Over engineered trains again. Would it not be eaiser to use the line
at 160mph and add 5 minutes to the London Paris journey time?

I thought the CTRL DS trains were only supposed to be running at
140mph?

Would it not be cheaper to upgrade the max 100 miles of track to the
overhead wires system that's used on the CTRL? Then the trains
wouldn't have to be so versatile...

Stop trying to remove the barriers! You'll have the SRA after you...

(Alex Terrell) wrote:

So after paying standard rates for the slowest trains in England
(Europe?) they're expected to pay extra for the fastest. Double the
rate would be inaffordable for too many commuters - how mnany people
commute on the Heathrow Express?


I am told there are a surprising number of Gatwick Express season
ticket holders - a premium fare service that wasn't designed for
commuters but seems to have attracted at least some.

TP wrote to uk.transport.london on Thu, 14 Oct 2004:

(Alex Terrell) wrote:

So after paying standard rates for the slowest trains in England
(Europe?) they're expected to pay extra for the fastest. Double the
rate would be inaffordable for too many commuters - how mnany people
commute on the Heathrow Express?


I am told there are a surprising number of Gatwick Express season
ticket holders - a premium fare service that wasn't designed for
commuters but seems to have attracted at least some.


My parents, on the rare occasions they are going to London for the
evening, always use it. They drive to Gatwick, park there, and carry on
from Victoria via public transport, or possibly a taxi. I asked them
once why they went on the rather more expensive service as opposed to
Southern, which is not only cheaper (especially as they have Elderly
Cards, or whatever they are called, but you know what I mean), but calls
at destinations nearer to where they live. The answer was that the
Gatwick services were reliably every 30 minutes throughout the night, so
they didn't have to worry about catching the last train! And I think
they have found the service more reliable than Southern (wouldn't be
difficult!). The 30-mile drive home doesn't seem to worry them.
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 26 September 2004

On 14 Oct 2004 03:29:03 -0700, (Richard
Thomas) wrote:
Would it not be cheaper to upgrade the max 100 miles of track to the
overhead wires system that's used on the CTRL? Then the trains
wouldn't have to be so versatile...

Not really, the original article said that the trains would have to
be: "specially built to cope with the different electrification
systems on the domestic and CTRL tracks", which is complete nonsense.
There's nothing special about dual-voltage trains. All trains on the
CTRL and some on the classic route already are.

How much should it cost? Across the channel there's exactly the same
situation. Years ago the service from Boulogne and Calais to Lille
was appalling with clapped-out trains and long gaps between them. Now
there's the TerGV that uses the old line from Boulogne to Calais and
then onto the "new" line to Lille. The supplement over the normal TER
(regional, unreserved) fare is €3 for a day, 10 for a week and 18 a
month. I'm sure the government have much higher figures in mind for
our new services...

Richard.

On 13 Oct 2004 15:12:26 -0700, (Alex Terrell)
wrote:


(Europe?) they're expected to pay extra for the fastest. Double the
rate would be inaffordable for too many commuters - how mnany people
commute on the Heathrow Express?

About as many as commute to [1] Heathrow by taxi? Remember, HEx is
designed as an alternative to taxis, not as an alternative to the
Piccadilly Line or buses. When the HEx stopping trains appear, they
will carry commuters to the airport.

Some people do commute on Gatwick Express, even though I /think/ a
"not GEx" ticket is available which would be cheaper.

[1]I can't imagine many people would commute /from/ Heathrow, owing to
a lack of housing near the airport stations?
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

"Bob" wrote in message ...
"Alex Terrell" wrote in message
om...
The specialised 186mph trains are due to start running from stations in
Kent
to London along the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), but ministers are
still
arguing over which rolling stock to order.

Over engineered trains again. Would it not be eaiser to use the line
at 160mph and add 5 minutes to the London Paris journey time?


It would be even easier to run it at 90mph and use MK1 EMUs (lots of them
going spare now), but that would be missing the point of the line, wouldn't
it?
Slam door?

I suspect train cost is proportional to kinetic energy, i.e rises with
the square of the velocity. So there will be an optimum speed.

It's about 70 miles St Pancras to the tunnel, so:

180 mph = 23 min
160 mph = 26 min
150 mph = 28 min
140 mph = 30 min
90 mph = 47 min

Trains running at 140 mph adds only 5 min, but makes the commuter
problem much, much easier.

(Velocities are max, I know average speeds will be less, but the logic
is the same).