| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 21:00:13 +0100, "Lüko Willms"
wrote: Am Thu, 26 Mar 2009 19:16:30 UTC, schrieb Charles Ellson auf uk.railway : To avoid the catastrophy of the Cologne Historical Archive which fell into the underground building site for a underground line... I think the British Library is a further back from the road, though. It is also a much more recent building and IIRC built to be somewhat more "disaster-proof". This building in Cologne had no problems until the underground line was built right next to it. The sucked the ground away from underneath the building with the ground water. The transit company had accepted the offer from a construction company for a cheaper method and thus not built a HDI sole at the bottom of the pit. But this is off-topic in this thread... This gives a new meaning to the term "Eau-de-Cologne". |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
"Martin Edwards" wrote How about Grantham? That would annoy the old bat. If we'd had a PM in the 1980s who had a positive rather than negative outlook on railways (and who did not think instinctively that any French or German policy was by definition nuts) we might have got a HSL from London to Birmingham and Manchester instead of the WCML PUG, which would have been much better value for money. Peter |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
[I think this is only on topic in uk.railway. Followups set.]
On 27/03/09 07:03, Martin Edwards wrote: Roger Lynn wrote: On 25/03/09 20:22, Lüko Willms wrote: -- the other one leaving central London to the East, stopping at Stratfort Int'l, then turning North with a station at Stanstead airport, Cambridge, and then Leeds. You've missed out both the East Midlands and South Yorkshire. How about Grantham? That would annoy the old bat. What about it? It's my home town. It's lucky to have the rail service that it has. When I lived in Gateshead it was a brilliant journey home. I don't expect a new high speed line to stop there though, but the East Midlands as a whole (which includes Nottingham, Leicester, Derby and numerous other towns) should have a station, as should South Yorkshire (and south County Durham/north North Yorkshire). Roger |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:44:08 +0100, "Lüko Willms"
wrote: Perhaps you don't exactly understand the meaning of the word "exactly". My reading filter always tries to make sense of what I read. Well, mostly. Tony P. is a civil engineer, and knows what he is talking about. |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
Am Fri, 27 Mar 2009 22:25:29 UTC, schrieb Andrew Price
auf uk.railway : On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:44:08 +0100, "Lüko Willms" wrote: Perhaps you don't exactly understand the meaning of the word "exactly". My reading filter always tries to make sense of what I read. Well, mostly. Tony P. is a civil engineer, and knows what he is talking about. BTW, this "exactly" turns only the same results if the soil conditions are exactly the same at Euston Road as in the Rhine valley. Cheers, L.W. -- ----------------------------------------------------- |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
Peter Masson wrote:
"Martin Edwards" wrote How about Grantham? That would annoy the old bat. If we'd had a PM in the 1980s who had a positive rather than negative outlook on railways (and who did not think instinctively that any French or German policy was by definition nuts) we might have got a HSL from London to Birmingham and Manchester instead of the WCML PUG, which would have been much better value for money. Peter I'll drink to that. -- Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management decisions. -From “Rollerball” |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
"Lüko Willms" wrote:
Am Fri, 27 Mar 2009 22:25:29 UTC, schrieb Andrew Price auf uk.railway : On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:44:08 +0100, "Lüko Willms" wrote: Perhaps you don't exactly understand the meaning of the word "exactly". My reading filter always tries to make sense of what I read. Well, mostly. Tony P. is a civil engineer, and knows what he is talking about. BTW, this "exactly" turns only the same results if the soil conditions are exactly the same at Euston Road as in the Rhine valley. At last, you understand the meaning of the word "exactly". ;-) |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
Martin Edwards wrote:
Peter Masson wrote: "Martin Edwards" wrote How about Grantham? That would annoy the old bat. If we'd had a PM in the 1980s who had a positive rather than negative outlook on railways (and who did not think instinctively that any French or German policy was by definition nuts) we might have got a HSL from London to Birmingham and Manchester instead of the WCML PUG, which would have been much better value for money. Peter I'll drink to that. Either there is a misunderstanding of political history here, or someone is trying to rewrite it. The government that was in power for the whole of the 1980s was about as benign towards the railway as any postwar administration has been. No-one dared privatise the railways - it was widely viewed by the Tory party as a privatisation too far. The problems started in 1992, when the Tories were unexpectedly re-elected with John Major as leader. The idiot had some misplaced fondness for the days of the "Big Four" pre-1948 and allowed the arch-privatisers to dismember the very successful Sectorised BR and sell it off. The same sort of assumptions that led to the Poll Tax debacle were allowed to pass unchallenged when it came to privatising BR. The same mistakes were made, and we have been paying a high price for them ever since. |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
In message , at 23:38:30 on
Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Tony Polson remarked: The problems started in 1992, when the Tories were unexpectedly re-elected with John Major as leader. The idiot had some misplaced fondness for the days of the "Big Four" pre-1948 and allowed the arch-privatisers to dismember the very successful Sectorised BR and sell it off. But as you know, he wanted to sell it off as integrated sectors, but the *railway* industry told him that wouldn't work, and that it was necessary to split things into the Railtrack/ROSCO/TOC system. -- Roland Perry |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
On Mar 27, 3:25*pm, Andrew Price wrote:
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 05:44:08 +0100, "Lüko Willms" wrote: Perhaps you don't exactly understand the meaning of the word "exactly".. *My reading filter always tries to make sense of what I read. Well, mostly. Tony P. is a civil engineer, and knows what he is talking about. That is funny! "Bruce" Polson is also a postmaster, civil servant, writer of political manifestos, and an ace photographer. And, even doing all of the above he still manages to be a benefactor of Scotland and the uk.railway village idiot. Whether AP knows what he is talking about is an altogether different question. |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 23:38:30 on Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Tony Polson remarked: The problems started in 1992, when the Tories were unexpectedly re-elected with John Major as leader. The idiot had some misplaced fondness for the days of the "Big Four" pre-1948 and allowed the arch-privatisers to dismember the very successful Sectorised BR and sell it off. But as you know, he wanted to sell it off as integrated sectors, but the *railway* industry told him that wouldn't work, and that it was necessary to split things into the Railtrack/ROSCO/TOC system. Given that the rational for the sell off was to "improve the railways by injecting competition" they were right. Unfortunately, this method of privatisation also increased the cost base considerably tim |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
In article ,
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 03:29:01 on Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Mizter T remarked: but you won't find that 10pm rush hour penetrating as far as Intercity services. Most major London termini are deserted from 8pm onwards. No they're not - e.g. King's Cross, Liverpool Street, London Bridge, Charing Cross, Waterloo, Victoria are all far from deserted after 8pm. Different definitions of "deserted" perhaps. As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 ye
|
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
In message , at 08:30:00 on Wed, 1
Apr 2009, Sarah Brown remarked: but you won't find that 10pm rush hour penetrating as far as Intercity services. Most major London termini are deserted from 8pm onwards. No they're not - e.g. King's Cross, Liverpool Street, London Bridge, Charing Cross, Waterloo, Victoria are all far from deserted after 8pm. Different definitions of "deserted" perhaps. As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. I'm not aware of that (are we perhaps talking about the last train on a Friday night)? In any event, one full train - perhaps 8 or even fewer coaches - doesn't generate enough footfall to make a big station like that "not deserted". -- Roland Perry |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
On Apr 1, 8:11 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:30:00 on Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Sarah Brown remarked: but you won't find that 10pm rush hour penetrating as far as Intercity services. Most major London termini are deserted from 8pm onwards. No they're not - e.g. King's Cross, Liverpool Street, London Bridge, Charing Cross, Waterloo, Victoria are all far from deserted after 8pm. Different definitions of "deserted" perhaps. As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. I'm not aware of that (are we perhaps talking about the last train on a Friday night)? In any event, one full train - perhaps 8 or even fewer coaches - doesn't generate enough footfall to make a big station like that "not deserted". -- Roland Perry You must be thinking of a different Kings Cross - the one in Sydney perhaps? Tim |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
In message
, at 02:58:43 on Thu, 2 Apr 2009, TimB remarked: As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. I'm not aware of that (are we perhaps talking about the last train on a Friday night)? In any event, one full train - perhaps 8 or even fewer coaches - doesn't generate enough footfall to make a big station like that "not deserted". You must be thinking of a different Kings Cross - the one in Sydney perhaps? Do they also have "standing room only" trains leaving after 8pm? -- Roland Perry |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
On Apr 2, 11:07 am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 02:58:43 on Thu, 2 Apr 2009, TimB remarked: As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. I'm not aware of that (are we perhaps talking about the last train on a Friday night)? In any event, one full train - perhaps 8 or even fewer coaches - doesn't generate enough footfall to make a big station like that "not deserted". You must be thinking of a different Kings Cross - the one in Sydney perhaps? Do they also have "standing room only" trains leaving after 8pm? -- Roland Perry There's a difference between 'not deserted' and 'standing room only'. Tim |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 11:09:17PM +0100, tim..... wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote: But as you know, he wanted to sell it off as integrated sectors, but the *railway* industry told him that wouldn't work, and that it was necessary to split things into the Railtrack/ROSCO/TOC system. Given that the rational for the sell off was to "improve the railways by injecting competition" they were right. Well, apart from the small matter of there not being any meaningful competition. -- David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice Irregular English: you have anecdotes; they have data; I have proof |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
In message
, at 03:41:38 on Thu, 2 Apr 2009, TimB remarked: As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. I'm not aware of that (are we perhaps talking about the last train on a Friday night)? In any event, one full train - perhaps 8 or even fewer coaches - doesn't generate enough footfall to make a big station like that "not deserted". You must be thinking of a different Kings Cross - the one in Sydney perhaps? Do they also have "standing room only" trains leaving after 8pm? There's a difference between 'not deserted' and 'standing room only'. There's also a difference between a four-car train that's standing room only, and a station that would be "virtually deserted" while those couple of hundred people wandered through the concourse looking for the right platform. And no-one has confirmed that this late night "standing room only" train actually exists. -- Roland Perry |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
"David Cantrell" wrote in message ... On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 11:09:17PM +0100, tim..... wrote: "Roland Perry" wrote: But as you know, he wanted to sell it off as integrated sectors, but the *railway* industry told him that wouldn't work, and that it was necessary to split things into the Railtrack/ROSCO/TOC system. Given that the rational for the sell off was to "improve the railways by injecting competition" they were right. Well, apart from the small matter of there not being any meaningful competition. But there is at lease some. with the alternative method, there wouldn't have been any at all tim |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
On Apr 2, 12:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 03:41:38 on Thu, 2 Apr 2009, TimB remarked: As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. I'm not aware of that (are we perhaps talking about the last train on a Friday night)? In any event, one full train - perhaps 8 or even fewer coaches - doesn't generate enough footfall to make a big station like that "not deserted". You must be thinking of a different Kings Cross - the one in Sydney perhaps? Do they also have "standing room only" trains leaving after 8pm? There's a difference between 'not deserted' and 'standing room only'. There's also a difference between a four-car train that's standing room only, and a station that would be "virtually deserted" while those couple of hundred people wandered through the concourse looking for the right platform. And no-one has confirmed that this late night "standing room only" train actually exists. -- Roland Perry Sarah said so, and I believe her. I haven't taken the 2315 for a few months, but it certainly loads well, though not to the point of standing passengers. On a Friday it's certainly eight cars as far as Cambridge (and needs to be), I can't remember offhand about Mon-Thurs. All I personally ever said is.that the London termini aren't deserted after 20.00. St Pancras, of course, may seem that way because so many of 'its' passengers are in the tunnels below. Tim |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
In message
, at 07:30:38 on Thu, 2 Apr 2009, TimB remarked: All I personally ever said is.that the London termini aren't deserted after 20.00. St Pancras, of course, may seem that way because so many of 'its' passengers are in the tunnels below. "Deserted" is what somewhere "seems" - it's all to do with the number of people per square yard and so a big space will be more deserted than a small space, containing the same number of people. Having seen several London terminii later in the evening, I still contend that they are "deserted" - irrespective of how many people are piled into one of the trains on one of the platforms. -- Roland Perry |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
On 2 Apr, 15:30, TimB wrote:
On Apr 2, 12:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 03:41:38 on Thu, 2 Apr 2009, TimB remarked: As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. I'm not aware of that (are we perhaps talking about the last train on a Friday night)? In any event, one full train - perhaps 8 or even fewer coaches - doesn't generate enough footfall to make a big station like that "not deserted". You must be thinking of a different Kings Cross - the one in Sydney perhaps? Do they also have "standing room only" trains leaving after 8pm? There's a difference between 'not deserted' and 'standing room only'. There's also a difference between a four-car train that's standing room only, and a station that would be "virtually deserted" while those couple of hundred people wandered through the concourse looking for the right platform. And no-one has confirmed that this late night "standing room only" train actually exists. -- Roland Perry Sarah said so, and I believe her. I haven't taken the 2315 for a few months, but it certainly loads well, though not to the point of standing passengers. On a Friday it's certainly eight cars as far as Cambridge (and needs to be), I can't remember offhand about Mon-Thurs. All I personally ever said is.that the London termini aren't deserted after 20.00. St Pancras, of course, may seem that way because so many of 'its' passengers are in the tunnels below. *Tim The 2315 is eight cars Mon-Thurs (though I think it terminates at Ely). It's never very busy on those days (mostly tipsy commuters rather than country folk on nights out in the big city). Most weekday trains from KX to Cambridge have spare seats from 1915 onwards except the slowish xx52 ones which stop at Stevenage, tend to be 4-cars, and are often full and standing as far as Stevenage. PaulO (sent from the 2015, which is 8 cars and half-full in the front carriage) |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
On Apr 2, 8:55 pm, wrote:
On 2 Apr, 15:30, TimB wrote: On Apr 2, 12:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 03:41:38 on Thu, 2 Apr 2009, TimB remarked: As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. I'm not aware of that (are we perhaps talking about the last train on a Friday night)? In any event, one full train - perhaps 8 or even fewer coaches - doesn't generate enough footfall to make a big station like that "not deserted". You must be thinking of a different Kings Cross - the one in Sydney perhaps? Do they also have "standing room only" trains leaving after 8pm? There's a difference between 'not deserted' and 'standing room only'. There's also a difference between a four-car train that's standing room only, and a station that would be "virtually deserted" while those couple of hundred people wandered through the concourse looking for the right platform. And no-one has confirmed that this late night "standing room only" train actually exists. -- Roland Perry Sarah said so, and I believe her. I haven't taken the 2315 for a few months, but it certainly loads well, though not to the point of standing passengers. On a Friday it's certainly eight cars as far as Cambridge (and needs to be), I can't remember offhand about Mon-Thurs. All I personally ever said is.that the London termini aren't deserted after 20.00. St Pancras, of course, may seem that way because so many of 'its' passengers are in the tunnels below. Tim The 2315 is eight cars Mon-Thurs (though I think it terminates at Ely). It's never very busy on those days (mostly tipsy commuters rather than country folk on nights out in the big city). Most weekday trains from KX to Cambridge have spare seats from 1915 onwards except the slowish xx52 ones which stop at Stevenage, tend to be 4-cars, and are often full and standing as far as Stevenage. PaulO (sent from the 2015, which is 8 cars and half-full in the front carriage) Also worth noting that KX also gets busier later in the evening when Moorgate closes and the Inner Suburbans switch to the Cross. Tim |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 ye
In article ,
wrote: In article , (Sarah Brown) wrote: In article , Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 03:29:01 on Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Mizter T remarked: but you won't find that 10pm rush hour penetrating as far as Intercity services. Most major London termini are deserted from 8pm onwards. No they're not - e.g. King's Cross, Liverpool Street, London Bridge, Charing Cross, Waterloo, Victoria are all far from deserted after 8pm. Different definitions of "deserted" perhaps. As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. Not many fasts to Cambridge IME. The 19:15 fills quite well but I've never failed to find a seat and see few standing passengers. The 20:52 is often "sitting on luggage rack or floor" territory as far as Royston (and a useless train to Cambridge anyway - might as well just have a cup of tea and catch the 8 carriage 21:15 which only gets in 2 minutes or so later), and the 22:15 is always very crowded when I catch it. |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the world within 12 years
In article ,
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:30:00 on Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Sarah Brown remarked: but you won't find that 10pm rush hour penetrating as far as Intercity services. Most major London termini are deserted from 8pm onwards. No they're not - e.g. King's Cross, Liverpool Street, London Bridge, Charing Cross, Waterloo, Victoria are all far from deserted after 8pm. Different definitions of "deserted" perhaps. As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. I'm not aware of that (are we perhaps talking about the last train on a Friday night)? I have no idea - I wouldn't feel safe catching that train. See my reply to Colin - the 20:52 and 22:15 are often packed. The 22:15 in particular often does the whole "filling the concourse and then causing a stampede when the platform is announced" thing. |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
In article ,
TimB wrote: On Apr 2, 12:20 pm, Roland Perry wrote: And no-one has confirmed that this late night "standing room only" train actually exists. -- Roland Perry Sarah said so, and I believe her. I've often found myself sitting on the floor of the 22:15 as far as Letchworth or Royston because I arrived at the station more than 2 minutes after the platform was announced. :-( |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
On Apr 3, 6:30 pm, Sarah Brown
wrote: In article , Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:30:00 on Wed, 1 Apr 2009, Sarah Brown remarked: but you won't find that 10pm rush hour penetrating as far as Intercity services. Most major London termini are deserted from 8pm onwards. No they're not - e.g. King's Cross, Liverpool Street, London Bridge, Charing Cross, Waterloo, Victoria are all far from deserted after 8pm. Different definitions of "deserted" perhaps. As I'm sure you're aware, there are plenty of trains leaving KX after 8pm which are standing-room only. I'm not aware of that (are we perhaps talking about the last train on a Friday night)? I have no idea - I wouldn't feel safe catching that train. Really? The 2315 often has a good contingent of dinner jackets coming back from the opera etc, and the rest are half-asleep. Tim |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
In article ,
TimB wrote: I'm not aware of that (are we perhaps talking about the last train on a Friday night)? I have no idea - I wouldn't feel safe catching that train. Really? The 2315 often has a good contingent of dinner jackets coming back from the opera etc, and the rest are half-asleep. I was more thinking of the midnight-oh-four, or whatever it is. I occasionally caught it in my student days - weird people they used to get on it! The 23:15 I don't often get, although the last time I did, I had a bunch of drunk Freemasons, in said dinner jackets, being extremely sexually pushy all the way to Cambridge. It was not a comfortable experience. |
(Times): Britain to have fastest train service in the worldwithin 12 years
On 02/04/09 15:49, Roland Perry wrote:
"Deserted" is what somewhere "seems" - it's all to do with the number of people per square yard and so a big space will be more deserted than a small space, containing the same number of people. Having seen several London terminii later in the evening, I still contend that they are "deserted" - irrespective of how many people are piled into one of the trains on one of the platforms. Marylebone certainly hasn't been deserted when I've used it between 9 and 11pm on weekday evenings. Roger |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:57 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk