"M.Whitson" wrote in message
...

I think you have missed the point. The important people are the denizens
of
Whitehall and the Palace of Westminster both within a short taxi ride of
Waterloo. Also you cannot escape the fact that it is more than likely that
a
very large proportion of E* passengers originate from locations with
direct
access to Waterloo. Paris/Brussels bound passengers from more than 40
miles
north of London will find it far more convenient and less time consuming
to
use their regional airport - Stanstead, Manchester, Liverpool Newcastle
etc.

Those from South-East of London find it more convenient to go to Ashford,
rather than go into London, transfer to Waterloo, walk down a very long
platform, and return whence they came. Gatwick was much more convenient, but
nature abhors a vacuum.
--
Terry Harper
http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

In message , at 23:03:05 on Mon,
15 Nov 2004, Terry Harper remarked:
Those from South-East of London find it more convenient to go to Ashford,
rather than go into London, transfer to Waterloo, walk down a very long
platform, and return whence they came. Gatwick was much more convenient, but
nature abhors a vacuum.

A year ago I had to plan a trip that involved an international flight
into Gatwick early morning, then getting to Brussels by lunchtime. There
was only one flight, which was too early. A train to Ashford was too
slow to make a useful connection with any of the few trains that stop at
Ashford. So I could only make it via Gatwick Express, Victoria and
Waterloo.

But my inbound flight was very late, and the next best plan was to drive
to Ashford and get to Brussels by teatime ahead of the second day of the
meeting (at least then I could drive straight home from Ashford on the
way back, rather than getting a train to Gatwick then driving home).

Integrated transport! Don't make me laugh.

--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
.uk...

A year ago I had to plan a trip that involved an international flight
into Gatwick early morning, then getting to Brussels by lunchtime. There
was only one flight, which was too early. A train to Ashford was too
slow to make a useful connection with any of the few trains that stop at
Ashford. So I could only make it via Gatwick Express, Victoria and
Waterloo.

But my inbound flight was very late, and the next best plan was to drive
to Ashford and get to Brussels by teatime ahead of the second day of the
meeting (at least then I could drive straight home from Ashford on the
way back, rather than getting a train to Gatwick then driving home).

Integrated transport! Don't make me laugh.

You would have done better to use Thameslink and change at London bridge for
Waterloo East. Anyway, train from Gatwick to Ashford is not one of the
natural routes to follow, especially if you don't live on the airport.
--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm
E-mail:
URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

In message , at 15:21:05 on Tue, 16
Nov 2004, Terry Harper remarked:
A year ago I had to plan a trip that involved an international flight
into Gatwick early morning, then getting to Brussels by lunchtime. There
was only one flight, which was too early. A train to Ashford was too
slow to make a useful connection with any of the few trains that stop at
Ashford. So I could only make it via Gatwick Express, Victoria and
Waterloo.

But my inbound flight was very late, and the next best plan was to drive
to Ashford and get to Brussels by teatime ahead of the second day of the
meeting (at least then I could drive straight home from Ashford on the
way back, rather than getting a train to Gatwick then driving home).

Integrated transport! Don't make me laugh.

You would have done better to use Thameslink and change at London bridge for
Waterloo East.

That would have been a possible route to Waterloo, if the plane hadn't
been late. (Remembering that several rush-hour Thameslinks don't go via
London Bridge). But given the circumstances it was better to drive to
Ashford to pick up the next (several hours later) train to Brussels,
rather than go via London and therefore have a car marooned at Gatwisk -
something which would have been a necessary sacrifice if I was getting
to Brussels in time, but not after having missed the afternoon session.

Anyway, train from Gatwick to Ashford is not one of the
natural routes to follow, especially if you don't live on the airport.

It's a direct line between two transport hubs. Like I said "Integrated
transport! Don't make me laugh."
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
.uk...


It's a direct line between two transport hubs. Like I said "Integrated
transport! Don't make me laugh."

It always makes me laugh when people talk about the transport system in this
country. Since when did transport in the UK ever constitute a system?

P C

Paul Clare wrote to uk.transport.london on Tue, 16 Nov 2004:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
o.uk...


It's a direct line between two transport hubs. Like I said "Integrated
transport! Don't make me laugh."

It always makes me laugh when people talk about the transport system in this
country. Since when did transport in the UK ever constitute a system?

Quite. Even when I was a girl - and that was rather a long time ago now
- the bus used ever-so-carefully to just miss the train, and we longed
for "integrated transport". And my father says the same was true when
he was a boy, although buses were more frequent then.....
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 6 November 2004 with new photos

Roland Perry wrote in
.uk:

That would have been a possible route to Waterloo, if the plane hadn't
been late. (Remembering that several rush-hour Thameslinks don't go
via London Bridge).

But returning back to the topic (E* and waterloo) the Thameslink trains do
go to King X so that would make it easire to get to St Panc

In message , at 19:37:46
on Tue, 16 Nov 2004, "Andrew Black (delete obvious bit)"
remarked:
That would have been a possible route to Waterloo, if the plane hadn't
been late. (Remembering that several rush-hour Thameslinks don't go
via London Bridge).

But returning back to the topic (E* and waterloo) the Thameslink trains do
go to King X so that would make it easire to get to St Panc

Yes, but half an hour longer. On my original timetable that wouldn't
have worked - unless all the departure times at StP are going to be half
an hour later (rather than the arrival times in Brussels/Paris being
half an hour earlier).
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
.uk...
In message , at 15:21:05 on Tue, 16
Nov 2004, Terry Harper remarked:

Anyway, train from Gatwick to Ashford is not one of the
natural routes to follow, especially if you don't live on the airport.

It's a direct line between two transport hubs. Like I said "Integrated
transport! Don't make me laugh."

I don't think that either the government or the SRA understand the term. And
even if they did, the Competition Commission would rule it out of order.
Then the Treasury would refuse to make the funds available. Two extra links
at Redhill would make all the difference.
--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm
E-mail:
URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

--- Terry Harper said:

Those from South-East of London find it more convenient to go to
Ashford,
rather than go into London, transfer to Waterloo, walk down a very
long
platform, and return whence they came. Gatwick was much more
convenient, but
nature abhors a vacuum.

Some parts of South East London, maybe? But what about those of us in
other parts of South London? To get from here to Ashford, I'd probably
have to go to Victoria or London Bridge and change for a semi-fast train
out to Ashford, taking forever to get there. And again on the way back.
There'd be no time left to enjoy my day trip to Paris at all.