Private enterprise won't necessarily work. In Victorian times the railways had a monopoly on long distance transport. Now almost everyone feels like driving, so demand for railways has to be managed (or increased) for environmental and congestion reasons.
Did the bad days of BR co-incide with a drop off in passenger numbers? I seem to remember reading that passenger numbers had steadily fallen until relatively recently.. anyone got figures?
"Old Oak Common"
Was/Is the Great Western engine shed that supplied Paddington, its also next door to Willesdon Junction (on the Euston line) - so useful.
The idea of a Heathrow connection is that it reduces the UK flights into Heathrow by getting people on trains direct to their long-haul flight.
So not having a third runway and the high-speed rail connecting to Heathrow are agreeable.
I don't believe that Crossrail stopping at OOC is a current reality, more of a desire.
Bit on a different note ELLx should be beginning services in 7 weeks
molgrips - Member
Private enterprise won't necessarily work. In Victorian times the railways had a monopoly on long distance transport. Now almost everyone feels like driving, so demand for railways has to be managed (or increased) for environmental and congestion reasons.
IIRC, towns were also involved in the development of railways. Seaside resorts to begin with, then property developers and industry looking to attract people. The tables have turned now and industry can decide where is wants to go.
it kinda makes sense, i think...
i forget the numbers, but a lot of flights into/outof Heathrow are internal flights - people who buy a flight from Manchester to New York, only to discover that they'll be flying to Heathrow along the way.
so, in principle, this new rail link could reduce the number of flights into/outof Heathrow.
leaving aside the fact that whenever I've flown from Manchester to New York it's been direct, I am aware that you can fly from Manchester to heathrow, though I would rather change planes at Amsterdam, Paris, Atlanta, anywhere but heathrow... Ignoring all that, and the fact that I don't think you can fly from Birmingham to heathrow...
Wouldn't it be much better for londoners to have the option of flying from Birmingham, which a high speed rail link from central London to Birmingham airport gives? Then the airports outside the south east can expand and take the pressure off the likes of heathrow. Adding heathrow to the high speed rail would only encourage use of heathrow.
Look at France for how to do things rail.
yes good but mega expensive high speed netwrok and it taking cash away from non high speed lines...
but show that sncf as a national provider can work - though hard to determine the true cost of it
There's a lot that could be improved with the current system but it's amazing how quickly people have forgotten quite how bad British Rail were...
I can only speak for my local rail network in the NW of england (I have used it for 20 years give or take), but I can honestly say that the network has only rapidly declined since BR was dissolved. We are still running the same trains on the same routes only with twice the passenger numbers and 3x the ticket price. AND still taking subsidies to do it. It's a joke.
"The plan is from what i understand, is for the new crossrail trains from east to west london will stop at ooc and continue to Heathrow in a bout 5-10mins -there will be 14trains per hour in each direction."
OK...makes a leetle more sense now if the Crossrail station was going to be built anyway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Speed_2#Crossrail_interchange
Look at France for how to do things rail.
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
