In message , at 08:12:02 on Thu, 4 Dec
2008, Martin Edwards remarked:
And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the
nearest that makes sense.

Wha? Chelmsford?

Doesn't have the required capacity to turn trains. The track beyond
Shenfield is also already quite busy with longer distance trains.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 08:16:49 on Thu, 4 Dec
2008, Martin Edwards remarked:
despite having to get through immigration (which, last time I entered
the US, in SFO wasn't too onerous at all).

I didn't find it too bad in Atlanta, but you do need a prebooked
address. In my case I wasn't visiting anyone but had booked the motel
(in Lafayette) on the Web.

You need an address wherever you enter, and starting real soon you have
to register your details in advance.
--
Roland Perry

In message
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Peter Masson wrote:

"Tom Anderson" wrote

No, Crossrail should stop at Slough, and concentrate on being an
affordable and effective suburban railway, and not a pie-in-the-sky all
things to all people scheme.

Crossrail will go to Maidenhead, Heathrow, Shenfield, and Abbey Wood.
Any strong pressure to change any of these destinations is more likely
to mean that Crossrail doesn't happen at all than that changes will be
made.

Yes. I'm not quite mad enough to argue for changes at this stage - rather,
i point out that the scheme is not optimal. It shouldn't really be going
to the GWML at all - the Waterloo lines would be a much better
destination, but for obscure reasons, they were dropped from consideration
a very long time ago.

How do you come up with that conclusion?

With the city business centre moving eastward it leaves Paddington even
further from many commuters ultimate destination. Waterloo has good links to
both the City and Docklands (the Drain and the Northern and Jubilee Lines)
already.

Also one of the principal objectives of Crossrail is to relieve the pressure
on the Central line, going to Waterloo won't help that.

Though, given that a significant proportion of Crossrail funding was supposed
to come from the banks, I suspect all these discussions are moot anyway.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

In message
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, 1506 wrote:

On Dec 3, 10:02*am, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 3 Dec, 17:46, 1506 wrote:

I didn't think there were too many left in NYC. *I can only recall one
short section in Manhattan. *Do the other Boroughs have many Els left?

Brooklyn is chockablock with them, and I think most of the Subway
network in Queen's is elevated.

(also, I'd question whether you can build a true El with brick
viaducts, given the lack of space underneath them)

Point taken, although I wonder what options were available in the 1860s?

Piles of compacted commoners.


Like the Chiswick flyover you mean?

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

In message
Sarah Brown wrote:

In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote:

And, of course, there's the District/Piccadilly line between Ealing and
Hammersmith

Jubilee and Metropolitan between West Hampstead and Kilburn, although
it's not a very long stretch.

Probably only the Central Line that doesn't have significant lengths of
elevated railway thinking about it.

Similarly, London Bridge to Canon Street & Blackfriars - ish.


I'd included the latter in my original comment about south London, most of
the ex-SR terminals are fed by an elevated system.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

In message
MIG wrote:

On Dec 4, 4:39*am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:13:13 on Wed, 3
Dec 2008, Peter Smyth remarked:

And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the
nearest that makes sense.

Southend Victoria? It is as close to Central London as Reading is.

Why would a commuter from Southend want to take a Crossrail train rather
than the much more direct line to Fenchurch St?

I am not all that convinced that many people want to travel through
London at all, although east - west might be more significant than
north - south.

Don't know if it still exists in the current economic situation, but there
used to be a lot of traffic between high tech firms in the Thames Valley and
places like Marconi at Chelmsford.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

"Roland Perry" wrote ...
Andrew Heenan remarked:
Not my area, and I wouldn't presume to guess.
But I am sure of one thing:
"Not Shenfield"

Bluff. Called.
[There's nowhere "slightly" further out than Shenfield that has the
capacity to turn the requisite number of trains]

Sneaky Pedant called:

1. I was not bluffing - I was expressing a view. Sorry about that.
2. When you quoted me, you chose to miss a key point:
"There are, of course, many options east of Liverpool Street, and a lot may
depend on who's in power come 2018."

I repeat, "Not my area, and I wouldn't presume to guess" - instead of trying
to be smart (and merely being smug) why not *use* your local knowledge to
see what other possibilities there are.

Warning: this may require an open mind and tad of imagination - do your
best.

Just imagine *you* are planning an East-West high capacity, high frequency
rail service, and you have a free choice of terminus, and go for it!

[tip: it is theoretically possible for More Than One to be used]

(And please don't tell me there's not one station on the Eastern that is
more appropiate than Shenfield - or I, and many others, will cease to
believe a word you say.)


--
Andrew

"When 'Do no Evil' has been understood, then learn the harder, braver rule,
Do Good." ~ Arthur Guiterman

"Peter Smyth" wrote ...
And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the
nearest that makes sense.
Southend Victoria? It is as close to Central London as Reading is.

Southend sounds an interesting possibility;

What's the objection to Cochester, assuming that was a serious suggestion?
--
Andrew

"When 'Do no Evil' has been understood, then learn the harder, braver rule,
Do Good." ~ Arthur Guiterman

"Colin McKenzie" wrote ...
Might be more sensible to electrify to at least Oxford, otherwise there
will still need to be an awful lot of diesel trains.

There's a fair chance of that, independently of crossrail.

But nice to think of a Cambridge- Oxford service, via Tottenham Court Road
["Alight Here for the University of London"!]
--

Andrew

"She plays the tuba.
It is the only instrument capable
of imitating a distress call."

"Roland Perry" wrote ...
Southend Victoria? It is as close to Central London as Reading is.
Why would a commuter from Southend want to take a Crossrail train rather
than the much more direct line to Fenchurch St?

Rather depends on the commuter's ultimate destination, I suppose.

But with Crossrail, they'd have achoice of destinations, wouldn't they?

(Like the lucky Asford commuters, slow to Cannon Street, or wafted to King's
Cross; choice is not always a bad thing.

Nor is change ;o)


--

Andrew

"She plays the tuba.
It is the only instrument capable
of imitating a distress call."