New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?

On Jun 27, 12:39 pm, Ian <ian.gro...@> wrote:
> On 27 Jun, 20:33, The Good Doctor <docnews2...@> wrote:
>
> > So Gordon is in No. 10 at last.
>
> > What changes will we see in transport policy, especially towards rail?
>
> If oly we had an ex-civil servant who kept banging on about his inside
> contacts here we might know better
>
> My guess: much more PFI.
>
> Ian

My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon.

Adrian

"Paul Scott" <notvalidpmscott@> wrote
>
> That should lead to a few questions about rail policy differences between
> Scotland and England - is it the Alloa - Kincardine route that goes
through
> or near Brown's constituency?
>
AIUI not through, or even very close to his constituency - but by taking the
coal trains for Kincardine Power Station away from the Forth Bridge it
should improve the performance of the passenger trains which do serve
Kirkcaldy.

Peter

On 27 Jun, 22:19, Mr Thant <maha.thray.sithu.u.th...@>
wrote:
> On Jun 27, 10:04 pm, "Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS"
>
> <adrian_h_hud...m> wrote:
> > My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon.
>
> It already has the government's full support ...

.... but not "support" in the sense of "financial backing". And if
there is one thing Mr Brown is good at, it's recognizing a monumental
waste of money when he sees one.

Hmm. Let's see. Electrify every main line in the UK, or build a tunnel
to make it slightly easier to commute from Maidenhead to Canary Wharf?
Tough call.

Ian

Ian wrote:
> On 27 Jun, 22:19, Mr Thant <maha.thray.sithu.u.th...@>
> wrote:
>> On Jun 27, 10:04 pm, "Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS"
>>
>> <adrian_h_hud...m> wrote:
>>> My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon.
>> It already has the government's full support ...
>
> ... but not "support" in the sense of "financial backing". And if
> there is one thing Mr Brown is good at, it's recognizing a monumental
> waste of money when he sees one.

So all those extra civil servants are "good value for money"?
>
> Hmm. Let's see. Electrify every main line in the UK, or build a tunnel
> to make it slightly easier to commute from Maidenhead to Canary Wharf?
> Tough call.
>
> Ian
>


--
Moving things in still pictures!

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
> In article <1182979141.599460.109800@k79g2000hse. .com>,
> maha.thray.sithu.u.thant@ (Mr Thant) wrote:
>> The Thameslink Programme, on the other hand...
>
> It's waiting for CSR2007 later in the year (allegedly, at current
> slippage rates it'll be 2008) for a funding decision. The planning
> permissions have been obtained.

CSR2007? Since when was that bandied about? AFAIAA it's actually PR2008,
although there may have been a change I'm not aware of. The fate of TL
will be tied to the HLOS and SoFA which the Gov. is required to publish
by July 31, although the latest I've heard is that it's due before July
26 when they break up for recess.

As far as bad omens go, however, I wonder what will happen if our
Darling friend becomes Chancellor?

On Jun 28, 10:15 am, John B <s...@johnband.org> wrote:
> On 27 Jun, 22:19, Mr Thant <maha.thray.sithu.u.th...@>
> wrote:
> (apart from
> people who think that its only purpose is to speed commuting times
> between Maidenhead and Canary Wharf - I suspect these are the same
> people who thought Thameslink's purpose was to speed commuting times
> between Streatham and St Albans).
>
You mean to say that isn't what it is for. Oh hang they are joining up
the link into Heathrow, just to give a bit more justification. Also
amazing how Canary Wharf came into the picture otherwise it was dead
duck. You would have thought that had somebody decided to spend
billions developing a run down dock area into a large business area
that they would have given somethought about how to get people in and
out, and perhaps stumping up some cash.

Kevin

Let me rephrase that last question - what will happen now that our
Darling Chancellor has arrived?

On Jun 28, 11:54 am, John B <s...@johnband.org> wrote:
> On 28 Jun, 11:41, Kev <k...@mwfree.net> wrote:
>

>
> And Canary Wharf's developers stumped up cash for the DLR and the JLE,
> and will most likely stump up cash for Crossrail as well (assuming the
> private sector funding model is based on the award of development
> rights, which is likely).
>
Really, what percentage of the cost of the Jubilee Ext and the DLR did
they cough up and are the developers currently putting money into the
Jubilee resignalling or DLR works.

Kevin

On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, John B wrote:

> On 28 Jun, 11:41, Kev <k...@mwfree.net> wrote:
>
>>> (apart from people who think that its only purpose is to speed
>>> commuting times between Maidenhead and Canary Wharf - I suspect these
>>> are the same people who thought Thameslink's purpose was to speed
>>> commuting times between Streatham and St Albans).
>>
>> You mean to say that isn't what it is for.
>
> The point is that it relieves the pressure on all the central
> Underground lines

Well, the Central line, and i think the Met and District, but not to the
same degree. I don't believe it does anything for any other lines; my
memory of the relief maps in the hoary old Central London Rail study is
that most of the nice green and blue bits are to the east.

Now, if they'd gone for the Wimbledon alignment ...

> plus Liverpool Street and Paddington mainline stations, plus the other
> transport links to Heathrow.

AIUI, Crossrail will take over the Heathrow paths that are currently in
use by Heathrow Connect; it won't provide more trains. Although, of
course, they'll be twice the size. Is HC currently anywhere near capacity?
I've never heard it suggested that it is; i suspect the premium fare may
have something to do with this. Will that go away with Crossrail? Even if
not, i suspect Crossrail will be more attractive than HC, since you don't
have to change at Paddington.

tom

--
Biochemistry is the study of carbon compounds that wriggle.