Airtrack to beat Crossrail to Heathrow?
 

wrote

What size market exists for travellers between Heathrow and Gatwick I
wonder? There are frequent coach links, until fairly recently (early
1990s?) a roughly 90 minute frequency S61 Helicopter service, and in
the 1960s and 1970s Westward Airways had a BN Islander aircraft passing
over our house almost hourly. It would be good to take some of those
coaches off the M25/M23.

It would, but it would be well nigh impossible to devise a fast rail route
on which robust paths could be provided -
Airtrack to Clapham Junction, but then either reverse at Stewarts Lane, or
negotiate Factory Junction, Herne Hill, Tulse Hill to get to the Brighton
Line
or GWML, WLL, and Brighton Line, all three of which are congested, and the
link via Acton Wells and Willesden Junction is slow (I suppose when E*s go
it would not be impossible to reopen the Old Oak Common East to North Pole
spur)
or resurrect the idea of going via Dudding Hill on to the MML then via
Thameslink.
I suppose if the Central Railway ever gets built it would not be completely
impossible to construct a few spurs and beg some paths between the freights.

Peter

Airtrack to beat Crossrail to Heathrow?
 

In article , (Roland Perry) wrote:

In message ,
at 20:51:00 on Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
Vine Road is a good example of what I mean. Close the crossings. The
traffic can perfectly well use Rocks Lane which is a perfectly good
bridge across the railway. If the highway authority don't like that
/they/ can build the bridge at their expense.

Isn't the problem that the highway was there first? The railway will
have been constructed on the basis that the highway remained open as
much as possible. If the railway want to renege on that bargain,
/they/ can pay.

That's a ludicrous claim. There were no motor vehicles when the railway was built. Nowadays it's not even a significant detour. I'm surprised the residents of Vine Road haven't got it closed as a rat run years ago.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Airtrack to beat Crossrail to Heathrow?
 

On 28 Dec 2005 13:35:24 -0800, wrote:

What size market exists for travellers between Heathrow and Gatwick I
wonder? There are frequent coach links, until fairly recently (early
1990s?) a roughly 90 minute frequency S61 Helicopter service, and in
the 1960s and 1970s Westward Airways had a BN Islander aircraft passing
over our house almost hourly. It would be good to take some of those
coaches off the M25/M23.

There are two distinct markets, passengers in transit and passengers
headed from home or wherever to the airport and vice-versa. The
helicopter service ceased when the M25 was completed between Reigate
and Staines, which was well before I stopped working in Crawley in
1990. In fact, I think that it was early in the 1980s.

The dedicated coach service then took over, running every 15 or 20
minutes, often with decent loads, and the tickets paid for by the
airlines for transit passengers. Previously there had been the 727
Green Line service, going the pretty way round through Reigate, Epsom,
Kingston, Sunbury, etc. Now there are frequent National Express and
Oxford Bus services between the two, all continuing to various points,
including Luton Airport, Stansted, Cambridge, etc.

I've used them all in the past, but eventually used our local private
hire firm for trips over 3 or 4 days, after which parking fees made
the use of one's own car uneconomical. After a 14-hour flight to
Heathrow, being chauffered is infinitely preferable to driving
oneself, or struggling on and off coaches and trains with luggage.

The diversity of destinations for the coaches travelling to and from
the airports makes it unlikely that any train service could replace
them. Virgin Cross-Country did try, but got thwarted. Admittedly not
for the LGW-LHR traffic.
--
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org

Airtrack to beat Crossrail to Heathrow?
 

Peter Masson wrote:
wrote

What size market exists for travellers between Heathrow and Gatwick I
wonder? There are frequent coach links, until fairly recently (early
1990s?) a roughly 90 minute frequency S61 Helicopter service, and in
the 1960s and 1970s Westward Airways had a BN Islander aircraft passing
over our house almost hourly. It would be good to take some of those
coaches off the M25/M23.

It would, but it would be well nigh impossible to devise a fast rail route
on which robust paths could be provided -
Airtrack to Clapham Junction, but then either reverse at Stewarts Lane, or
negotiate Factory Junction, Herne Hill, Tulse Hill to get to the Brighton
Line
or GWML, WLL, and Brighton Line, all three of which are congested, and the
link via Acton Wells and Willesden Junction is slow (I suppose when E*s go
it would not be impossible to reopen the Old Oak Common East to North Pole
spur)
or resurrect the idea of going via Dudding Hill on to the MML then via
Thameslink.
I suppose if the Central Railway ever gets built it would not be completely
impossible to construct a few spurs and beg some paths between the freights.

Peter

I was referring to the Airtrack proposal showing the link to the
Wokingham-Redhill line. I'll see if there is a link to it. I saw the
article in a newspaper about a month ago.

Airtrack to beat Crossrail to Heathrow?
 

wrote:
Peter Masson wrote:
wrote

What size market exists for travellers between Heathrow and Gatwick I
wonder? There are frequent coach links, until fairly recently (early
1990s?) a roughly 90 minute frequency S61 Helicopter service, and in
the 1960s and 1970s Westward Airways had a BN Islander aircraft passing
over our house almost hourly. It would be good to take some of those
coaches off the M25/M23.

It would, but it would be well nigh impossible to devise a fast rail route
on which robust paths could be provided -
Airtrack to Clapham Junction, but then either reverse at Stewarts Lane, or
negotiate Factory Junction, Herne Hill, Tulse Hill to get to the Brighton
Line
or GWML, WLL, and Brighton Line, all three of which are congested, and the
link via Acton Wells and Willesden Junction is slow (I suppose when E*s go
it would not be impossible to reopen the Old Oak Common East to North Pole
spur)
or resurrect the idea of going via Dudding Hill on to the MML then via
Thameslink.
I suppose if the Central Railway ever gets built it would not be completely
impossible to construct a few spurs and beg some paths between the freights.

Peter

I was referring to the Airtrack proposal showing the link to the
Wokingham-Redhill line. I'll see if there is a link to it. I saw the
article in a newspaper about a month ago.



The proposal was a short spur from the Staines line allowing trains to
travel through Woking and Guildford with infill electrification
allowing access to Gatwick. Timings wouldn't be fast in modern terms,
but would be faster than the M25/M23 alternative.

Airtrack to beat Crossrail to Heathrow?
 

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Roland Perry) wrote:

In message
,
at 20:51:00 on Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
Vine Road is a good example of what I mean. Close the crossings.
The traffic can perfectly well use Rocks Lane which is a
perfectly good bridge across the railway. If the highway
authority don't like that /they/ can build the bridge at their
expense.

Isn't the problem that the highway was there first? The railway
will have been constructed on the basis that the highway remained
open as much as possible. If the railway want to renege on that
bargain, /they/ can pay.

That's a ludicrous claim. There were no motor vehicles when the
railway was built. Nowadays it's not even a significant detour. I'm
surprised the residents of Vine Road haven't got it closed as a rat
run years ago.

Perhaps it's because they find it convenient to be able to go either
north or south from their home without needing to battle through the
jams at the A205/A306 junction. Also, my map says there is a sports
ground and bowling green between the two level crossings, with road
access possible only from Vine Road.

In addition to the two Vine Road crossings, there are three more, at
White Hart Lane, Sheen Lane (by Mortlake station, B351) and Manor Road
(B353). Closing these crossings would put intolerable pressure on other
roads that bridge the railway. As in many parts of London, the railways
are a significant constraint on the free movement of people and goods.
You suggest that the "highway authorities" should solve the problem.
That just means that the cost would fall on the council tax payers of
L.B. Richmond-upon-Thames. Evidently you don't live there.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Airtrack to beat Crossrail to Heathrow?
 

wrote:
wrote:
Peter Masson wrote:
wrote


I suppose if the Central Railway ever gets built it would not be completely
impossible to construct a few spurs and beg some paths between the freights.

Peter

I was referring to the Airtrack proposal showing the link to the
Wokingham-Redhill line. I'll see if there is a link to it. I saw the
article in a newspaper about a month ago.



The proposal was a short spur from the Staines line allowing trains to
travel through Woking and Guildford with infill electrification
allowing access to Gatwick. Timings wouldn't be fast in modern terms,
but would be faster than the M25/M23 alternative.



http://airtrack.org/what_is_airtrack.htm

Found it!

Airtrack to beat Crossrail to Heathrow?
 

In article , (Richard J.) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Roland Perry) wrote:

In message
,
at 20:51:00 on Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
Vine Road is a good example of what I mean. Close the crossings.
The traffic can perfectly well use Rocks Lane which is a
perfectly good bridge across the railway. If the highway
authority don't like that /they/ can build the bridge at their
expense.

Isn't the problem that the highway was there first? The railway
will have been constructed on the basis that the highway remained
open as much as possible. If the railway want to renege on that
bargain, /they/ can pay.

That's a ludicrous claim. There were no motor vehicles when the
railway was built. Nowadays it's not even a significant detour. I'm
surprised the residents of Vine Road haven't got it closed as a rat
run years ago.

Perhaps it's because they find it convenient to be able to go either
north or south from their home without needing to battle through the
jams at the A205/A306 junction. Also, my map says there is a sports
ground and bowling green between the two level crossings, with road
access possible only from Vine Road.

As I said, a road problem. The sports ground could be accessed via the Hounslow Loop crossing anyway.

In addition to the two Vine Road crossings, there are three more, at
White Hart Lane, Sheen Lane (by Mortlake station, B351) and Manor Road
(B353). Closing these crossings would put intolerable pressure on
other roads that bridge the railway.

This is quite a common problem. Look at the issues in London with river bridge approaches.

As in many parts of London, the
railways are a significant constraint on the free movement of people
and goods. You suggest that the "highway authorities" should solve the
problem. That just means that the cost would fall on the council tax
payers of L.B. Richmond-upon-Thames. Evidently you don't live there.

The way roads developments are funded it would fall on the Treasury but would rightly be seen as roads and not rail expenditure.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Airtrack to beat Crossrail to Heathrow?
 

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Richard J.) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Roland Perry) wrote:

In message
,
at 20:51:00 on Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
Vine Road is a good example of what I mean. Close the crossings.
The traffic can perfectly well use Rocks Lane which is a
perfectly good bridge across the railway. If the highway
authority don't like that /they/ can build the bridge at their
expense.

Isn't the problem that the highway was there first? The railway
will have been constructed on the basis that the highway remained
open as much as possible. If the railway want to renege on that
bargain, /they/ can pay.

That's a ludicrous claim. There were no motor vehicles when the
railway was built. Nowadays it's not even a significant detour.
I'm surprised the residents of Vine Road haven't got it closed as
a rat run years ago.

Perhaps it's because they find it convenient to be able to go
either north or south from their home without needing to battle
through the jams at the A205/A306 junction. Also, my map says
there is a sports ground and bowling green between the two level
crossings, with road access possible only from Vine Road.

As I said, a road problem.

No, you implied there wasn't a problem ("The traffic can perfectly well
use Rocks Lane ...").
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Airtrack to beat Crossrail to Heathrow?
 

In message , at
21:57:00 on Wed, 28 Dec 2005, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
Vine Road is a good example of what I mean. Close the crossings. The
traffic can perfectly well use Rocks Lane which is a perfectly good
bridge across the railway. If the highway authority don't like that
/they/ can build the bridge at their expense.

Isn't the problem that the highway was there first? The railway will
have been constructed on the basis that the highway remained open as
much as possible. If the railway want to renege on that bargain,
/they/ can pay.

That's a ludicrous claim. There were no motor vehicles when the railway
was built. Nowadays it's not even a significant detour.

It would be if *all* the crossings in question were closed.

--
Roland Perry