http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7829676.stm

Well, there you go. I have to say I was unsure about whether the
government would opt for it bit it seems they have. To make good use
of the vernacular, there is going to be a total and utter **** storm
about this. It's going to prompt massive and wide scale protests from
a whole cross-section of people. I'm not quite sure how the Tories
pledge of no third runway fits in with this - if the Tories are
elected in 2010 will they scrap work on it? One can only presume that
nothing will have actually happened on the ground by then.

The BBC article has this to say on the time scale of proceedings:

---quote---
Asked about the decision on Wednesday, Prime Minister Gordon Brown
declined to guarantee MPs a vote on the issue.

Should the government give the go-ahead, he said there would be a
debate in Parliament and that the scheme would have to be granted
planning permission.

This is likely to be a lengthy process, with work on a new runway
unlike to be completed before 2019
---/quote---


Also, with regards to the whole issue of high-speed rail links and
Heathrow Hubs and the like, the BBC piece only says this:
---quote---
Alongside the commitment to a new runway, Transport Secretary Geoff
Hoon is expected to announce increased investment in public transport,
including a new high-speed rail link from the airport to central
London.
---/quote---

I suspect that's not what is really meant - or is it? Surely the Big
Idea is to link in Heathrow to a new north-south high-speed line - but
it's far from clear whether the current government might actually
subscribe to this Big Idea, even as part of a package along with
making Heathrow the transport hub of the known Universe.

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:51:21 -0800 (PST) someone who may be Mizter T
wrote this:-

---quote---
Alongside the commitment to a new runway, Transport Secretary Geoff
Hoon is expected to announce increased investment in public transport,
including a new high-speed rail link from the airport to central
London.
---/quote---

I suspect that's not what is really meant - or is it?

I'll wait for the announcement. However, they faced two choices:

1) the same old stuff which has got this in the current mess. Expand
Heathrow and provide some fig leaves for the embarrassed to hide
behind.

2) put their claimed policies on climate change, equatability, the
economy and jobs into action. Get rid of most of the short distance
flights by transferring the trips onto trains, leaving plenty of
space for long distance flights.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

In message
, at
17:51:21 on Wed, 14 Jan 2009, Mizter T remarked:
---quote---
Alongside the commitment to a new runway, Transport Secretary Geoff
Hoon is expected to announce increased investment in public transport,
including a new high-speed rail link from the airport to central
London.
---/quote---

I suspect that's not what is really meant - or is it?

They seem to be talking about a new line from Heathrow to St Pancras.

The original HEx plans had a second terminus at St Pancras, via a route
through north London - this new one might be a tunnel. Is it too late to
divert Crossrail slightly, and have one of its stations at St Pancras?
Or maybe a very long travelator from Farringdon
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
news
In message
, at
17:51:21 on Wed, 14 Jan 2009, Mizter T remarked:
---quote---
Alongside the commitment to a new runway, Transport Secretary Geoff
Hoon is expected to announce increased investment in public transport,
including a new high-speed rail link from the airport to central
London.
---/quote---

I suspect that's not what is really meant - or is it?

They seem to be talking about a new line from Heathrow to St Pancras.

The original HEx plans had a second terminus at St Pancras, via a route
through north London - this new one might be a tunnel. Is it too late to
divert Crossrail slightly, and have one of its stations at St Pancras? Or
maybe a very long travelator from Farringdon

Crossrail is not an 'express' service. Its services are all stations
stoppers
from the airport, which is why it takes over Connect, not HEx. Unless it is
to have overtaking loops of course...

Looking at the supposed hub proposals, I suspect the existing HEx will be
almost as fast to the existing terminals 123 (East) and 5, as it won't
include a change at the 'Hub'. Given the tunnel from St Pancras to
Stratford, and as far as the surface at Dagenham, is speed limited, the
latest proposals also probably won't necessarily provide HSL speeds as far
as Heathrow anyway?

Paul

On Jan 15, 1:51*am, Mizter T wrote:
of the vernacular, there is going to be a total and utter **** storm
about this. It's going to prompt massive and wide scale protests from

Especially given that passenger numbers at heathrow are dropping
according to this report. The whole thing stinks. Wouldn't surprise me
if the whole thing is just an excuse for the government to create
another show project to pretend their in touch with business.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...4/baa-heathrow

B2003

In message , at 09:21:53 on
Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Paul Scott remarked:
Given the tunnel from St Pancras to Stratford, and as far as the
surface at Dagenham, is speed limited, the latest proposals also
probably won't necessarily provide HSL speeds as far as Heathrow anyway?

I'd be very surprised if plans for a HSL from Heathrow to St Pancras
were in any way inhibited from describing a similarly speed restricted
tunnel as "High Speed".

It's all spin, anyway. Like the so-called High Speed line from Brussels
to Amsterdam, which will use the existing tracks (no faster than 15
minute transit time) from [a little before] Schiphol into the city
centre.
--
Roland Perry

In message
, at
01:35:13 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, remarked:
Especially given that passenger numbers at heathrow are dropping
according to this report. The whole thing stinks.

We are in a "bust", so of course short-term passenger numbers are likely
to fall. The new runway is (one possible) solution for the capacity
required in the next "boom". If there's not going to be another "boom",
we don't need a lot of things, including Crossrail.
--
Roland Perry

On Jan 15, 1:51*am, Mizter T wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7829676.stm

Well, there you go. I have to say I was unsure about whether the
government would opt for it bit it seems they have. To make good use
of the vernacular, there is going to be a total and utter **** storm
about this. It's going to prompt massive and wide scale protests from
a whole cross-section of people. I'm not quite sure how the Tories
pledge of no third runway fits in with this - if the Tories are
elected in 2010 will they scrap work on it? One can only presume that
nothing will have actually happened on the ground by then.

The Tories can't decide whether they object to an expansion of airport
capacity on principle, or whether, as Boris says, it's just Heathrow
that is unsuitable. Rather like Labour didn't reverse rail
privatisation when they came to power, I suspect the Tories wouldn't
reverse any decision on Heathrow. Anyway, let's wait for the official
announcement.

On Jan 15, 10:08*am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message
, at
01:35:13 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, remarked:

Especially given that passenger numbers at heathrow are dropping
according to this report. The whole thing stinks.

We are in a "bust", so of course short-term passenger numbers are likely
to fall. The new runway is (one possible) solution for the capacity
required in the next "boom". If there's not going to be another "boom",
we don't need a lot of things, including Crossrail.

When you're in a bust you don't start spending billions on vanity
projects. Even in the boom years heathrow could cope with the
passenger numbers so why build a new runway now when they're
dropping?? Its like saying "oh , theres less traffic on the roads -
lets build some bypasses!"

B2003

In message
, at
02:23:51 on Thu, 15 Jan 2009, remarked:

Especially given that passenger numbers at heathrow are dropping
according to this report. The whole thing stinks.

We are in a "bust", so of course short-term passenger numbers are likely
to fall. The new runway is (one possible) solution for the capacity
required in the next "boom". If there's not going to be another "boom",
we don't need a lot of things, including Crossrail.

When you're in a bust you don't start spending billions on vanity
projects.

So you'd recommend suspending Crossrail until we are well into the next
boom (and suffering from the fact it doesn't exist yet)?

Even in the boom years heathrow could cope with the
passenger numbers

fsvo "cope".

so why build a new runway now when they're dropping??

because it's predicted to rise, later.

Of course, there might be other solutions, such as closing Heathrow and
running 4tph Eurostar to CDG - but have you modelled the consequences
for the UK economy?

Its like saying "oh , theres less traffic on the roads -
lets build some bypasses!"

The road building programme (such as it is) hasn't been suspended
because of the bust.
--
Roland Perry