"Lüko Willms" wrote
DB could do what you formulate in your question above, or they could
simply dispend of ICRR and manage the Eurostar traffic on Great
Britain themselves,

Er, we've been here before... it's *in* Great Britain to everyone here
(except for the one or two eccentrics on (or in) these groups who sprang to
your defence last time...)

I can work out what you meant by 'dispend'.

On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 18:08:44 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

(2) Heathrow as such is not one place -- it is currently three places
(T123, T4, T5) and may by 2020 be four (T6, adjacent to the third
runway, would be the other one).

I thought the plans for T6 put it in place of T123 , with a T5A & B
being built first.

wrote

I thought the plans for T6 put it in place of T123 , with a T5A & B
being built first.

I'm not sure of BAA's intended timescales, but 'Heathrow Central' would be a
new terminal on the site of and replacing T123, while T6 will be adjacent to
the railway between Hayes & Harlington and T123. Accordingly, with three
stops HEx and Crossrail trains will be able to serve T6, Heathrow Central
and T5, or T6, Heathrow Central, and T4. Do LUL have any plans to get the
Piccadilly Line to T6, and if so, how?

Peter

On 25 Mar, 23:17, "Peter Masson" wrote:

wrote

I thought the plans for T6 put it in place of T123 , with a T5A & B
being built first.

I'm not sure of BAA's intended timescales, but 'Heathrow Central' would be a
new terminal on the site of and replacing T123, while T6 will be adjacent to
the railway between Hayes & Harlington and T123. Accordingly, with three
stops HEx and Crossrail trains will be able to serve T6, Heathrow Central
and T5, or T6, Heathrow Central, and T4. Do LUL have any plans to get the
Piccadilly Line to T6, and if so, how?


I'd think any such plans would basically be advanced by BAA as opposed
to LUL these days - that's broadly how the tube extension to T5 came
about. Of course LUL would be integrally involved in any such plans -
e.g. working out how the new service would run - but the model of how
things were done with T5, where BAA paid for the extension and then
got it built, would surely be followed. Apart from anything else it's
hard to see any Mayor of London exercising themselves or indeed the
TfL budget over serving a new airport terminal they don't want (and I
can't really see any future Mayor adopting a fundamentally different
policy on this).

Am Wed, 25 Mar 2009 20:40:54 UTC, schrieb Mizter T
auf uk.railway :

This railfaneurope.net page suggests that the split in ownership of
Eurostar Group Ltd is EUKL 33%, SNCF 62%, SNCB/NMBS 5% - ok, so LCR is
a partner through it's wholly owned subsidiary EUKL rather than a
direct partner in Eurostar Group Ltd, but that's just a technicality.

No, it isnt. Since if the British share in Eurostar Group Ltd were
held by L&CR, a sale of EUKL would not pass this ownership to the
buyer of EUKL, but stay with L&CR, among whose owners one finds
SNCF...

Railfaneurope... I wait for a reply from SNCF Participations to my
query...

* And if, if neither the owner of the British Eurostar trainsets
(EUKL) nor the company which is the railway undertaking running those
trains on British soil (ICRR) are partners in Eurostar Group Ltd, on
what contractual basis can Eurostar Group Ltd interfere in the
business of EUKL and ICRR?

Read what I said! I did mention LCR.

Sure, but EUKL handed management of Eurostar on Great Britain over
to ICRR. What is then left to EUKL to do? I would think that not EUKL,
but ICRR is the partner in Eurostar Group Ltd, and that the 62% which
SNCF gives on their SNCF-Participations website is the addition of a
direct share and the indirect via ICRR.


Cheers,
L.W.

-- -----------------------------------------------------

Am Wed, 25 Mar 2009 22:02:25 UTC, schrieb Roland Perry
auf uk.railway :

Couldn't DB run the equivalent of an open-access operation, alongside a
renewed "franchise" for the UK Eurostar operations?

This is no franchise ....

ICRR sounds just like GNER running a franchise on the ECML.

not to me.

If not, what's the essential difference.

This is not a government contract with a private company, but a
contract between two private companies, where one charges the other to
do its work.

And ATOC does not list Eurostar as a franchise.


Cheers,
L.W.

-- -----------------------------------------------------

Am Wed, 25 Mar 2009 23:00:40 UTC, schrieb "John Salmon"
auf uk.railway :

"Lüko Willms" wrote
DB could do what you formulate in your question above, or they could
simply dispend of ICRR and manage the Eurostar traffic on Great
Britain themselves,

Er, we've been here before... it's *in* Great Britain to everyone here

Great Britain is an island.

In case you go to vacations to the largest of the Balearen islands,
would you spend your time _on_ Mallorca, or _in_ Mallorca?

I can work out what you meant by 'dispend'.

My reminiscences of Latin interferes sometimes with my english
vocabulary... The proper form of the verb I meant to use is "dispense"
like in "dispense with ICRR".

Thanks for helping to improve my English!


Cheers,
L.W.

-- -----------------------------------------------------

In message
, at
08:31:33 on Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Lüko Willms
remarked:
ICRR sounds just like GNER running a franchise on the ECML.

not to me.

If not, what's the essential difference.

This is not a government contract with a private company, but a
contract between two private companies, where one charges the other to
do its work.

Yes, so the only difference is that in one case it's the Government
letting the contract, and in the other it's a multinational quasi-public
sector company that's letting the contract.
--
Roland Perry

Am Thu, 26 Mar 2009 07:46:38 UTC, schrieb Roland Perry
auf uk.railway :

This is not a government contract with a private company, but a
contract between two private companies, where one charges the other to
do its work.

Yes, so the only difference is that in one case it's the Government
letting the contract, and in the other it's a multinational quasi-public
sector company that's letting the contract.

The management contract is between Eurostar (UK) Ltd (EUKL) and
Intercapital and Regional Railways Ltd (ICRR). EUKL is 100% owned by
L&CR. In how far is EUKL a "multinational quasi-public sector
company"?


Cheers,
L.W.

-- -----------------------------------------------------

In message
, at
09:38:24 on Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Lüko Willms
remarked:
The management contract is between Eurostar (UK) Ltd (EUKL) and
Intercapital and Regional Railways Ltd (ICRR). EUKL is 100% owned by
L&CR. In how far is EUKL a "multinational quasi-public sector
company"?

My understanding is that L&CR is nationalised in all but name, and one
of the shareholders is SNCF.

--
Roland Perry