|
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004, Stevie D wrote:
Yes, the railways may lose a small amount of revenue by closing Waterloo International. But the additional cost of maintaining and serving two international terminal stations in London would be far higher than the revenue that will be lost from the few passengers who will defect to air travel or other means. I don't see it quite that way. They're opening two new intermediate stations, after all: they clearly feel they can "afford" the cost of running those. Surely the key point is that the Waterloo route has no sensible access to 25kV overhead power, let alone to the high-speed line? So they'd be stuck with the existing third-rail infrastructure as far as Fawkham Junction, which, in spite of past upgrades, still leaves E* trains under-powered. Nevertheless, if you search the web you find lots of places where it's reported that some E* traffic to/from Waterloo will be maintained. So if it's true that E* is going to totally abandon Waterloo, either someone has been telling porkies in the past, or the intentions have changed. Some improvements in connecting services would be most welcome. But the past record of joined-up thinking in this land does not exactly fill me with hope. all the best |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message . ac.uk,
Alan J. Flavell writes Nevertheless, if you search the web you find lots of places where it's reported that some E* traffic to/from Waterloo will be maintained. So if it's true that E* is going to totally abandon Waterloo, either someone has been telling porkies in the past, or the intentions have changed. The whole reason why this thread started is because Eurostar announced last week that they have finally decided to totally abandon any facility at Waterloo! -- Paul Terry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004, Paul Terry wrote:
So if it's true that E* is going to totally abandon Waterloo, either someone has been telling porkies in the past, or the intentions have changed. The whole reason why this thread started is because Eurostar announced last week that they have finally decided to totally abandon any facility at Waterloo! Er, as I read it, they *announced* last week that a decision has been made. They don't say when that decision had been taken. hth |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
|
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Colin Rosenstiel" wrote in message ... In article , (Jack Taylor) wrote: From Olympia the train would have reversed to Latchmere No. 3 Junction before taking the curve to join the South Western main line to Waterloo at West London Junction, rejoining the normal route just after the Stewarts Lane flyover trails in. Fine except that it's the South Western Windsor Lines. There is no connection to the Main line on this route. Yes, fair point, although with the OP's lack of knowledge of the alternative routing I wouldn't have expected them to know the difference between the Wimbledon lines and the Windsor lines. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message
Martin Rich wrote: [snip] Which line is that? For many (most?) Waterloo commuters the natural way to St Pancras is to get off their national rail train at Vauxhall, admittedly not the nicest or easiest of interchanges, and get the Victoria Line which in my experience is usually quick and efficient. Given my national rail (aka SWT) train to Waterloo doesn't stop at Vauxhall that is not a great deal of help. I'm in the quadrant that is probably most affected by the change. I'm too far west to make using Ashford at all attractive and too far south for an easy journey to St Pancras. Also will there be CIV tickets available? -- Graeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Solar Penguin" wrote in message ...
--- Charley_Ashbury said: As much as I'd like to go on train, as we prefer it, I drive us down to Ashford, or we fly from Manchester. I don't want to suffer multiple changes and dragging of suitcases on the tube, just to London and the SE can have Waterloo for their sole "exclusive" use. I think you've missed the point. Those of us in London and the SE want Waterloo *as well as* St. Pancras. Just having one or the other is always going to be inconvenient for someone. It's easy: get off at Vauxhall, get on the Victoria Line, get off at KXSP. That is one of the easiest cross-London transfers ever. If your particular train doesn't stop at Vauxhall, perhaps you would like to lobby SWT to stop it there. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
|
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
For SWT services that stop at Vauxhall, the Victoria line to King's
Cross will be a better bet - but the interchange at Vauxhall, with luggage, in the rush hour, is an abomination. Vauxhall's fine. If you want a crappy interchange, try getting from the Northern Line to the LB&SC side of London Bridge. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Peter Masson" wrote in message ...
"Alex Terrell" wrote in message om... My suggestion. Act now, build extended, 400m platforms at a few outer London station (perhaps Surbiton and Staines), and use these to consolidate 8 carriage trains into 16 carriage trains for the final trip through London. It would not be difficult to use these platforms for Windsor Line trains, making it much less likely for any trains to have to queue up outside Waterloo waiting for platforms. But that wonn't make use of the platform length - it would probably be too expensive to extend any Windsor line station to take 12x20m trains, let alone 16- or 20-car. But it would be great for each platform to take two 8x65' trains. That way, 5 (maybe 6) trains could be stored between rush hours. There could be a case for running 15x23m trains on the Southampton Main Line, with platform extensions at, say, Woking, Basingstoke, Winchester, Southampton Airport Parkway and Southampton Central. But to make use of the long platforms at Waterloo, the Fast Lines on the SWML would have to cross the Windsor Lines. I don't think there's room after the Chatham Line bridge to get up to the Linford Street flyover, so it would mean something like getting the Windsor Lines to dive under the Main Lines between Clapham Junction and Culvert Road. The cost would be likely to get so many noughts on it to destroy any business case. Or there's that little flyover that used to exist in Putney... There's also the question of what to do with all the passenger accommodation at Waterloo International, waiting rooms, immigration offices, etc. Would it convert into a shopping mall? ;-) Especially if they forcibly redeploy the customs officers as sales assistants :-D |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
|
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , James
writes For SWT services that stop at Vauxhall, the Victoria line to King's Cross will be a better bet - but the interchange at Vauxhall, with luggage, in the rush hour, is an abomination. Vauxhall's fine. ROFL! No lifts. No escalators. No disabled access/ Long rickety staircase that's so over-crowded you have to wait several minutes to use it in the rush hour. Remember that Eurostar passengers are likely to have LUGGAGE - and even the day trippers tend to come back with a dozen bottles of wine. -- Paul Terry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
James wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 22 Nov 2004:
It's easy: get off at Vauxhall, get on the Victoria Line, get off at KXSP. That is one of the easiest cross-London transfers ever. If your particular train doesn't stop at Vauxhall, perhaps you would like to lobby SWT to stop it there. All those steps? With heavy luggage? I *don't* think so. -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 22 November 2004 |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Paul Terry" wrote in message ... In message , James writes Vauxhall's fine. ROFL! No lifts. No escalators. No disabled access/ Long rickety staircase that's so over-crowded you have to wait several minutes to use it in the rush hour. At least they have put in a second staircase to platforms 7 and 8 now which has made things better. Dave |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , Dave Liney
writes "Paul Terry" wrote in message ... In message , James writes Vauxhall's fine. ROFL! No lifts. No escalators. No disabled access/ Long rickety staircase that's so over-crowded you have to wait several minutes to use it in the rush hour. At least they have put in a second staircase to platforms 7 and 8 now which has made things better. Not for people on all the various services that stop at the other platforms! -- Paul Terry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Paul Terry" wrote in message ... In message , Dave Liney writes "Paul Terry" wrote in message ... In message , James writes Vauxhall's fine. ROFL! No lifts. No escalators. No disabled access/ Long rickety staircase that's so over-crowded you have to wait several minutes to use it in the rush hour. At least they have put in a second staircase to platforms 7 and 8 now which has made things better. Not for people on all the various services that stop at the other platforms! But I don't use them so that's okay. (That is the attitude we're meant to take isn't it? Otherwise I can't see why so many people are complaining about the Eurostar terminal moving all of 1.9 miles across a city with a very good public transport links.) If you want flat interchanges then go to Waterloo as normal and get a bus to Euston (at least three routes IIRC) and walk from there. Or you could walk to Aldwych and get a direct bus from there. It'll take around 30 minutes either way. Dave. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , at 14:03:50 on
Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Dave Liney remarked: I can't see why so many people are complaining about the Eurostar terminal moving all of 1.9 miles across a city with a very good public transport links.) It'll take around 30 minutes either way. hmm, 3.8mph might be one reason! -- Roland Perry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , Dave Liney
writes But I don't use them so that's okay. (That is the attitude we're meant to take isn't it? No - your reasoning has failed. The argument is not about things we don't use - it is about facilities that are currently in place and that we do use - and that are not being replaced by anything comparable. Otherwise I can't see why so many people are complaining about the Eurostar terminal moving all of 1.9 miles across a city with a very good public transport links.) Its not the distance. Its the time and inconvenience that is the problem - as you so very well demonstrate. If you want flat interchanges then go to Waterloo as normal and get a bus to Euston (at least three routes IIRC) and walk from there. Or you could walk to Aldwych and get a direct bus from there. It'll take around 30 minutes either way. What's the point? Heathrow is 15 minutes drive from this part of South-West London and flying is cheaper. -- Paul Terry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 07:17:38 +0000, Mrs Redboots
wrote: James wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 22 Nov 2004: It's easy: get off at Vauxhall, get on the Victoria Line, get off at KXSP. That is one of the easiest cross-London transfers ever. If your particular train doesn't stop at Vauxhall, perhaps you would like to lobby SWT to stop it there. All those steps? With heavy luggage? I *don't* think so. Perhaps when they close Waterloo Intl they can be persuaded to move some of the redundant escalators to Vauxhall? -- Peter Lawrence |
Buses from Waterloo to King's Cross (was Eurostar to quit Waterloo)
Dave Liney wrote:
"Paul Terry" wrote in message ... In message , Dave Liney writes "Paul Terry" wrote in message ... In message , James writes Vauxhall's fine. ROFL! No lifts. No escalators. No disabled access/ Long rickety staircase that's so over-crowded you have to wait several minutes to use it in the rush hour. At least they have put in a second staircase to platforms 7 and 8 now which has made things better. Not for people on all the various services that stop at the other platforms! But I don't use them so that's okay. (That is the attitude we're meant to take isn't it? Otherwise I can't see why so many people are complaining about the Eurostar terminal moving all of 1.9 miles across a city with a very good public transport links.) If you want flat interchanges then go to Waterloo as normal and get a bus to Euston (at least three routes IIRC) and walk from there. Or you could walk to Aldwych and get a direct bus from there. It'll take around 30 minutes either way. Why on earth isn't there a direct bus between Waterloo and King's Cross?! I never even noticed that before. These are arguably the two most important railway termini. This is especially bad when there isn't even a direct Tube route between the two. I guess that the roadworks would foul up the reliability of any buses serving King's Cross. I hope they extend the 59, 68 or 188 once the construction works are complete. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Paul Terry" wrote in message ... In message , Dave Liney writes But I don't use them so that's okay. (That is the attitude we're meant to take isn't it? No - your reasoning has failed. The argument is not about things we don't use - it is about facilities that are currently in place and that we do use - and that are not being replaced by anything comparable. It's only an extra 25-30 minutes away and the reduced journey time when the CTRL phase 2 is opened will eat into most of this so I disagree that it is not being replaced by anything comparable. Otherwise I can't see why so many people are complaining about the Eurostar terminal moving all of 1.9 miles across a city with a very good public transport links.) Its not the distance. Its the time and inconvenience that is the problem - as you so very well demonstrate. I suggest that more people have reduced journey time and inconvenience getting to StP than have increased journey time. The idea that only people in SWT-land use Eurostar services is a joke, yet some on this newsgroup seem to believe it. If you want flat interchanges then go to Waterloo as normal and get a bus to Euston (at least three routes IIRC) and walk from there. Or you could walk to Aldwych and get a direct bus from there. It'll take around 30 minutes either way. What's the point? Heathrow is 15 minutes drive from this part of South-West London and flying is cheaper. So fly. Though is the cost of parking/taxis and flights really less than that of train and Eurostar, and would you really save time when checking in time is taken into consideration? Of course it is then there is a good, cheap public transport solution to getting to Paris in your area of London which means that if by moving Eurostar's London terminus those that don't have one at present gain one. Sounds like everyone's a winner. Dave. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In uk.railway Graeme Wall wrote:
Given my national rail (aka SWT) train to Waterloo doesn't stop at Vauxhall that is not a great deal of help. I'm in the quadrant that is probably most affected by the change. I'm too far west to make using Ashford at all attractive and too far south for an easy journey to St Pancras. Also will there be CIV tickets available? I must be missing something as I do Waterloo-St Pancras everytime I go and see my girlfriend in Bournemouth (thus avoiding Virgin voyagers and CT fun since the Cov-Loughborough service was shelved). This is sometimes with a _large_ rucksack or trolley for a week's stay. I usually go St.Pancras to Leicester Square on the Piccy and then on to Waterloo on the Northern. There's a few steps in there and sometimes the Tube can be a bit packed (especially at peak times) but its not a big deal IMHO. Jim'll |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
wrote in message ... In uk.railway Graeme Wall wrote: Given my national rail (aka SWT) train to Waterloo doesn't stop at Vauxhall that is not a great deal of help. I'm in the quadrant that is probably most affected by the change. I'm too far west to make using Ashford at all attractive and too far south for an easy journey to St Pancras. Also will there be CIV tickets available? I must be missing something as I do Waterloo-St Pancras everytime I go and see my girlfriend in Bournemouth (thus avoiding Virgin voyagers and CT fun since the Cov-Loughborough service was shelved). This is sometimes with a _large_ rucksack or trolley for a week's stay. I usually go St.Pancras to Leicester Square on the Piccy and then on to Waterloo on the Northern. There's a few steps in there and sometimes the Tube can be a bit packed (especially at peak times) but its not a big deal IMHO. The bid advantage of the old SR was that it offered interchange between it's surface lines. As the CTRL goes through, err, Kent, why can't we have a connecting service between Waterloo and whichever convenient station on the CTRL they choose? |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
|
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , at 19:53:50 on Tue, 23 Nov
2004, MartinM remarked: The bid advantage of the old SR was that it offered interchange between it's surface lines. As the CTRL goes through, err, Kent, why can't we have a connecting service between Waterloo and whichever convenient station on the CTRL they choose? You can currently do Waterloo East to Ashford in 1hr 4 mins, direct. That's almost as fast as E* manages. -- Roland Perry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , Dave Liney
writes "Paul Terry" wrote in message ... The argument is not about things we don't use - it is about facilities that are currently in place and that we do use - and that are not being replaced by anything comparable. It's only an extra 25-30 minutes away In each direction. And its not just the time but the inconvenience of additional (and very poor) interchanges when carrying luggage - for some people this will be four *additional* interchanges on a round trip. and the reduced journey time when the CTRL phase 2 is opened will eat into most of this 15 minutes - so we lose half an hour on each return journey *and* have extra interchanges - including the delight of humping suitcases up the stairs at Vauxhall or on and off of buses. so I disagree that it is not being replaced by anything comparable. That's fine. It won't be an arrangement I envisage using. I suggest that more people have reduced journey time and inconvenience getting to StP than have increased journey time. Taken the population at large, that is probable. The question running throughout this thread is ... are those cohorts of people in other parts of the capital likely to require business trips or desire leisure breaks in Eurostar destinations? Like it or not, the people who NEED to make business trips to the continent have tended to live in SWLondon partly because of the proximity of Heathrow and more latterly Eurostar from Waterloo. The idea that only people in SWT-land use Eurostar services is a joke, yet some on this newsgroup seem to believe it. You don't strengthen your case by making silly exaggerations such as "only" people in SWT-land. If you note the very large numbers that make the short journey across the concourse from Waterloo International to the SWT platforms, you will see that a large proportion of Eurostar's customers travel by SWT. That doesn't mean that "everyone" does, and it is a joke that you make such a ridiculous exaggeration. What's the point? Heathrow is 15 minutes drive from this part of South-West London and flying is cheaper. So fly. I shall. And that is exactly the point. People like me who have made many Eurostar journeys in the past are unlikely to continue to do so if the service is degraded to below that obtainable from Heathrow. Eurostar will lose that custom. Hopefully it will build up new customers - if it doesn't then everyone can expect a poorer service. Though is the cost of parking/taxis and flights really less than that of train and Eurostar, Yes, significantly so. The other half will happily drop me at Heathrow for almost no cost since it takes only 15 minutes or so each way. I certainly wouldn't get a similar lift from here to St Pancras, which is seldom less than a two-hour round-trip! and would you really save time when checking in time is taken into consideration? Yes. In the finely-balanced equation, that is the "edge" over flying that Eurostar will lose. They were always more expensive, but they were slightly quicker, more pleasant and more convenient. They are likely to remain more expensive and even more pleasant, but will no longer be quicker or so convenient. Of course it is then there is a good, cheap public transport solution to getting to Paris in your area of London which means that if by moving Eurostar's London terminus those that don't have one at present gain one. No. They have one already - it is called Waterloo. They don't use it because they find having to travel across London too inconvenient. Does that ring a bell? Anyone with business sense (and that has seldom included Eurostar) would realise that the way to increase trade is to increase your outlets, not close them. Sounds like everyone's a winner. Clearly not :( -- Paul Terry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
Martin Rich wrote:
Which line is that? For many (most?) Waterloo commuters the natural way to St Pancras is to get off their national rail train at Vauxhall, admittedly not the nicest or easiest of interchanges, and get the Victoria Line which in my experience is usually quick and efficient. The problem is that so many trains don't stop at Vauxhall, which means an additional change at Clapham Junction, which is not an experience for the faint-hearted! -- Stevie D \\\\\ ///// Bringing dating agencies to the \\\\\\\__X__/////// common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs" ___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________ |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Peter Lawrence" wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 07:17:38 +0000, Mrs Redboots wrote: James wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 22 Nov 2004: It's easy: get off at Vauxhall, get on the Victoria Line, get off at KXSP. That is one of the easiest cross-London transfers ever. If your particular train doesn't stop at Vauxhall, perhaps you would like to lobby SWT to stop it there. All those steps? With heavy luggage? I *don't* think so. Perhaps when they close Waterloo Intl they can be persuaded to move some of the redundant escalators to Vauxhall? I think I have a solution to the problem. Run frequent domestic services between Waterloo (formerly) International and Ashford International (via CTRL Phase 1) using the paths freed up by the withdrawal of Eurostar services. Problem solved? I think so. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
|
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
|
Buses from Waterloo to King's Cross (was Eurostar to quitWaterloo)
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Dave Arquati wrote:
Dave Liney wrote: If you want flat interchanges then go to Waterloo as normal and get a bus to Euston (at least three routes IIRC) and walk from there. Or you could walk to Aldwych and get a direct bus from there. It'll take around 30 minutes either way. Why on earth isn't there a direct bus between Waterloo and King's Cross?! I never even noticed that before. These are arguably the two most important railway termini. No, since one of those is Liverpool Street. Just because it mostly serves Essex and Hackney doesn't mean you can ignore it! Gaaah! Unless you have some definition of 'important' that is not related to passenger numbers, in which case you will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes. This is especially bad when there isn't even a direct Tube route between the two. You are of course quite right that there should be a direct bus. There should probably be direct, and perhaps somewhat expressed, bus services linking every pair of mainline termini that do not have a direct rail link. tom -- Optical illusions are terrorism of the mind. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Roland Perry" wrote in message
.uk... You can currently do Waterloo East to Ashford in 1hr 4 mins, direct. That's almost as fast as E* manages. Thanks, that ends the argument! -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Paul Terry" wrote in message ... In message , Dave Liney writes I suggest that more people have reduced journey time and inconvenience getting to StP than have increased journey time. Taken the population at large, that is probable. The question running throughout this thread is ... are those cohorts of people in other parts of the capital likely to require business trips or desire leisure breaks in Eurostar destinations? There is a world outside of London where people live and commute. You seem to be suggesting that business people only live south west of London whereas looking at arrivals in the northern termini on a weekday morning would suggest otherwise. Of course it is then there is a good, cheap public transport solution to getting to Paris in your area of London which means that if by moving Eurostar's London terminus those that don't have one at present gain one. No. They have one already - it is called Waterloo. They don't use it because they find having to travel across London too inconvenient. So Waterloo is a good and cheap solution for those north of London but St Pancras is not a good, cheap solution for those south of London, who apparently already have a good link to the continent in Heathrow. Does that ring a bell? Only an IMBY alert. Anyone with business sense (and that has seldom included Eurostar) would realise that the way to increase trade is to increase your outlets, not close them. Someone should let Tesco know that they haven't any business sense then when they opened a larger store near Huntingdon and closed their town centre store. You could argue the ethics of so doing but it obviously made business sense because they'd already done the same thing in Hatfield (Hertfordshire) and many other places. Dave |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , Dave Liney
writes There is a world outside of London where people live and commute. You seem to be suggesting that business people only live south west of London whereas looking at arrivals in the northern termini on a weekday morning would suggest otherwise. Why do you keep making incorrect assumptions? I said nothing about business people living *only* in South West London. This is the second time you have tried to make an argument out of a false assumption. I have merely observed that when travelling by Eurostar I see very many people continuing their journey by SWT. Obviously, not everyone does. So Waterloo is a good and cheap solution for those north of London No. Now you are making your third false assumption. The interchange between St Pancras and Waterloo is poor, especially when carrying luggage. Eurostar had the opportunity of enabling all of their customers to avoid making that cross London journey. They have chosen not to. Only an IMBY alert. Yes - IMBY is good. What actually do you feel is wrong in suggesting that there should be Eurostar terminals both north AND south of the city for the maximum convenience of passengers? -- Paul Terry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Paul Terry" wrote in message ... In message , Dave Liney writes There is a world outside of London where people live and commute. You seem to be suggesting that business people only live south west of London whereas looking at arrivals in the northern termini on a weekday morning would suggest otherwise. Why do you keep making incorrect assumptions? I said nothing about business people living *only* in South West London. This is the second time you have tried to make an argument out of a false assumption. "are those cohorts of people in other parts of the capital likely to require business trips or desire leisure breaks in Eurostar destinations?" I don't think it is an assumption to read what you wrote as meaning that you don't believe that there are a significant number or people who use Eurostar for business (who I assume are the ones on business trips) outside of south west London. I have merely observed that when travelling by Eurostar I see very many people continuing their journey by SWT. Obviously, not everyone does. So Waterloo is a good and cheap solution for those north of London No. Now you are making your third false assumption. "They have one [a good, cheap public transport solution to getting to Paris] already - it is called Waterloo". You said it. Hardly an assumption. "They don't use it because they find having to travel across London too inconvenient" Let's say you are right in this (and I'm not sure you are). South west London has Heathrow conviniently situated for journeys to Paris whereas north London doesn't. So let's spread the benefit of quick and easy journeys to Paris by having south west London go to Heathrow, south east London to Ashford and north London to StP. What actually do you feel is wrong in suggesting that there should be Eurostar terminals both north AND south of the city for the maximum convenience of passengers? There is nothing wrong with that suggestion. But when there isn't a business case for two terminals then one will have to close. Closing StP isn't an option (it would make the CTRL phase 2 rather pointless) so Waterloo has to. I could suggest that it would be convinient for the ECML to have a terminal at Waterloo as well but it's unlikely to stand up as a business case. Dave |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
"Dave Liney" wrote:
There is a world outside of London where people live and commute. You seem to be suggesting that business people only live south west of London whereas looking at arrivals in the northern termini on a weekday morning would suggest otherwise. You have missed the point. That is, the customer profile of Eurostar passengers from the UK would indicate that there is an exceptionally high proportion whose journeys originate in the SWT corridor. That's because the SWT corridor is where so many 'movers and shakers' choose to locate. It ain't called 'the stockbroker belt' for nowt. St Pancras is not really a viable option for those people. Instead, they will head around the M25 for Heathrow or Gatwick. That is the reason why I suggested a regular Waterloo-Ashford service using former Eurostar paths and connecting with Eurostar trains at Ashford International. I think that is the only way Eurostar can hope to retain this large and affluent customer base. |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
--- Dave Liney said... There ... isn't a business case for two terminals then one will have to close. Closing StP isn't an option (it would make the CTRL phase 2 rather pointless) so Waterloo has to. Yes, but why should our railways only do what is demanded *only* by the business case? There's this little thing called subsidy, which can be used to persuade them to go against the business case when it makes sense in terms of the wider picture. Why not use that to keep Waterloo Int'l open? |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , Dave Liney
writes "are those cohorts of people in other parts of the capital likely to require business trips or desire leisure breaks in Eurostar destinations?" Yes, that is the question I asked. You didn't answer it, though. I don't think it is an assumption to read what you wrote as meaning Sheesh! There you go again! PLEASE stop assuming what I think. "They have one [a good, cheap public transport solution to getting to Paris] already - it is called Waterloo". You said it. Hardly an assumption. Oh gawd, and you can't spot irony either. I am pointing out the fallacy in your argument that the St Pancras - Waterloo change is so quick and easy. Let's say you are right in this (and I'm not sure you are). South west London has Heathrow conviniently situated for journeys to Paris whereas north London doesn't. So let's spread the benefit of quick and easy journeys to Paris by having south west London go to Heathrow, south east London to Ashford and north London to StP. Why encourage the pollution that air travel causes when there is ALREADY and international rail terminal at Waterloo. when there isn't a business case for two terminals then one will have to close. Closing StP isn't an option (it would make the CTRL phase 2 rather pointless) so Waterloo has to. Only if you believe that Eurostar have done their sums properly ... or, if cynical, that Eurostar will use the threat of closure of Waterloo to get money out of the government. Personally, I find it very difficult to believe there is a good business case. Incidentally, you are only considering travel FROM London. I wonder how many of the foreign tourists who come TO London for a short break, and who can currently walk to many attractions from Waterloo, will bother to come here when they find they are deposited amid the delights of King's Cross? I could suggest that it would be convinient for the ECML to have a terminal at Waterloo as well but it's unlikely to stand up as a business case. If there was already an ECML terminal at Waterloo handling millions of passengers a year, you would close it? -- Paul Terry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , at 10:31:58 on
Wed, 24 Nov 2004, TP remarked: You have missed the point. That is, the customer profile of Eurostar passengers from the UK would indicate that there is an exceptionally high proportion whose journeys originate in the SWT corridor. That's because the SWT corridor is where so many 'movers and shakers' choose to locate. It ain't called 'the stockbroker belt' for nowt. St Pancras is not really a viable option for those people. Instead, they will head around the M25 for Heathrow or Gatwick. Isn't that why they are building a new E* station on the M25? -- Roland Perry |
Eurostar to quit Waterloo
In message , at 11:23:16 on Wed, 24 Nov
2004, Paul Terry remarked: I wonder how many of the foreign tourists who come TO London for a short break, and who can currently walk to many attractions from Waterloo, will bother to come here when they find they are deposited amid the delights of King's Cross? The Kings Cross area is pretty grim, but so is the immediate area round Gare du Nord and Brussels Midi. So these "foreigners" should feel immediately at home! -- Roland Perry |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:38 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk