Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 4 May 2005, Dave Arquati wrote:


Richard J. wrote:


"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...


On Sat, 30 Apr 2005, Dave Arquati wrote:


Anon wrote:


I'm particulary interested about the third runway possibility.
Where would they squeeze it in?

Basically by demolishing parts of two villages to the north of the
current airport, but to the south of the M4.

Would that mean yet another closure of the Piccadilly? Does the
current work make any provision for future expansion? Or would it not
have its own station? What about HX?

The official proposal is for a third runway, not a sixth terminal, so
no new railway construction is currently envisaged. However, some
reports have said the new runway would require its own terminal,
otherwise the planned increase in flights could not be achieved. I
haven't seen any discussion of the surface transport implications of a
sixth terminal.

I was under the impression that at least some "satellite terminals"
would be required (if not a full sixth terminal), as there is such a
distance between the current terminals and the proposed runway.

If a new terminal were required, presumably a HEx/Crossrail station
could be constructed around the existing running tunnels for the
Heathrow rail branch, as that would probably pass underneath or nearby
any new terminal construction.


Very true. No tube, though?

It's not in the DfT document. Any Piccadilly extension would be very
problematic - the service pattern would be very complicated! Crossrail
would hopefully provide a cheap and fast link into central London, with
interchange available at Ealing for some of west London.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Dave Arquati wrote:
Richard J. wrote:

The official proposal is for a third runway, not a sixth terminal,
so no new railway construction is currently envisaged. However,
some reports have said the new runway would require its own
terminal, otherwise the planned increase in flights could not be
achieved. I haven't seen any discussion of the surface transport
implications of a sixth terminal.

I was under the impression that at least some "satellite terminals"
would be required (if not a full sixth terminal), as there is such a
distance between the current terminals and the proposed runway.

That is indeed BAA's view, but was not part of the original government
proposal. The relevant passage in the White Paper is this:

"11.65 The airport operator argued in its consultation response that
the full potential of a third runway could not be realised without a
sixth terminal to the north of the A4. They suggested four possible
options for new facilities. In all cases more land would be needed than
allowed for in the consultation option, which assumed that terminal
capacity would be provided within the airport boundary. In principle, we
recognise the force of these arguments and suggest that the operator
should carry out further work on proposals for terminal capacity and an
appraisal of the impacts, on the basis of which a further consultation
would be required."

If a new terminal were required, presumably a HEx/Crossrail station
could be constructed around the existing running tunnels for the
Heathrow rail branch, as that would probably pass underneath or nearby
any new terminal construction.

Depends where BAA want to build T6. The HEx tunnels run to the east of
the proposed third runway.

The surface transport implications associated with a new terminal are
much the same as for the new runway; the same increase in traffic will
need to be accommodated in any case.

Yes, but it makes a big difference to the railway/tube situation if a
new terminal is built 2 - 3 km from the existing terminals and stations.

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address

Uncle Tom Cobleigh and all wrote .......................................
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...
James Farrar wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote:

James Farrar wrote:

Dave Arquati wrote:

Anon wrote:

Hello all.
Are there any good websites about Heathrow. Its past, present and
future.
I'm particulary interested about the third runway possibility.
Where would
they squeeze it in?





Basically by demolishing parts of two villages to the north of the
current airport, but to the south of the M4.




That would eliminate the IC (and former Chelsea FC) sports ground,
would it not?



If that's the place in Harlington, then most likely (I'm not
particularly sporty so I haven't had the pleasure of going there...).


That's the one.

http://www.alwaystouchout.com/project/61




""NOTRAG" (No Third Runway Action Group)"

It should be a Say NO to Third Runway Action Group...



Thanks - duly corrected.


You misunderstand me.

It is actually a NOTRAG, but I think it would be funnier if it *were* a
SNOTRAG...

Now that's just mean... I was busy preparing for exams and I wasn't
concentrating!

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Eh ?
Baz

Dave Arquati wrote:

Now that's just mean... I was busy preparing for exams and I wasn't
concentrating!

Bloody student.

Says the IC alumnus.

James Farrar wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote:

Now that's just mean... I was busy preparing for exams and I wasn't
concentrating!


Bloody student.

Says the IC alumnus.

No comment.

Says the ex-staff :-)

On Fri, 6 May 2005, Dave Newt wrote:

James Farrar wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote:

Now that's just mean... I was busy preparing for exams and I wasn't
concentrating!

Bloody student.

Says the IC alumnus.

No comment.

Says the ex-staff :-)

My god! They're like cockroaches round here!

tom

--
The major advances in civilization are processes that all but wreck the societies in which they occur. -- Alfred North Whitehead

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 6 May 2005, Dave Newt wrote:


James Farrar wrote:

Dave Arquati wrote:


Now that's just mean... I was busy preparing for exams and I wasn't
concentrating!

Bloody student.

Says the IC alumnus.

No comment.

Says the ex-staff :-)


My god! They're like cockroaches round here!

What, the most likely thing to survive a nuclear war? I didn't realise
the Holland Bar was so bomb-proof...

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Dave Arquati wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Fri, 6 May 2005, Dave Newt wrote:


James Farrar wrote:

Dave Arquati wrote:


Now that's just mean... I was busy preparing for exams and I wasn't
concentrating!


Bloody student.

Says the IC alumnus.


No comment.

Says the ex-staff :-)



My god! They're like cockroaches round here!


What, the most likely thing to survive a nuclear war? I didn't realise
the Holland Bar was so bomb-proof...


I'm still yet to see any formal recognition of the Holland Club's existence.

I used to just walk in and ignore the signs requiring membership. Is
that how it's meant to work?!

Dave Newt wrote:

I'm still yet to see any formal recognition of the Holland Club's
existence.

I used to just walk in and ignore the signs requiring membership. Is
that how it's meant to work?!

My understanding from a friend of mine who used to be bar staff there is
that the membership requirement hasn't been taken seriously for around a
decade.

Let's face it, it's so hidden away that you need to know it's there!

Is it that place underneath the Sherfield building? I'm nearing the end
of my fourth year and just spotted the bar down there the other night.
Or is that something else?

James Farrar wrote:
Dave Newt wrote:

I'm still yet to see any formal recognition of the Holland Club's
existence.

I used to just walk in and ignore the signs requiring membership.
Is
that how it's meant to work?!

My understanding from a friend of mine who used to be bar staff there
is
that the membership requirement hasn't been taken seriously for
around a
decade.

Let's face it, it's so hidden away that you need to know it's there!