The Kink in the Channel Tunnel Rail Link

[Mizter T]

On 23 Mar, 21:10, "Paul Scott" <notvalidpmsc...@***************> wrote:
> "Mizter T" <mizte...@**********> wrote:
>
> > On 23 Mar, 15:33, "Peter Masson" <peter.mass...@************> wrote:
>
> >> "Michael Bell" <mich...@beaverbell.co.uk> wrote
>
> >> > Commuter traffic should do well. But maybe not enough not soon enough
> >> > to make a difference.
>
> >> Even that may take longer to build up than the government and
> >> Southeastern seem to assume. There are no that many commuters
> >> from Ashford and further east, although Ashford is expanding fast.
> >> And Kent commuters, used to walking from Cannon Street and
> >> Charing Cross to their offices, will not easily be seduced by fast
> >> trains to North London at much higher fares than they are used to.
>
> > I agree. I think the CTRL-DS services will be popular eventually, but
> > they'll be a slow burner.
>
> There will be some employment changes dependent on the type of business
> enticed to the Kings Cross development area - but I guess this will lag the
> rail service by some years?

The so-called "Kings Cross Central" development on the old railway
lands is only really just getting started.

>
> Perhaps some government department or other will move to KX, and try for a
> tick in the box marked 'relocated to the north'...
>

Ha!

[Mizter T]

On 23 Mar, 23:02, Tony Polson <docnews2...@***************> wrote:

> Ar <A...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 01:56:26 -0700, Mwmbwls wrote:
>
> >> The Rail Freight Groups newsletter raises concerns over the future
> >> management and ownership of HS1. Considering the protection and funding
> >> given to this project over the years and the aspiration for it to form a
> >> template for a High Speed Network for the rest of the country surely the
> >> infrastructure should now become part of Network Rail's asset base as
> >> was always intended before Railtrack's collapse?
>
> >Bring HS1 under control of government quango "Network Rail", great idea.
> >We'll all happily pay through the nose for the new incomprehensible fare
> >structures they would bring in, make sure the system creeks despite the
> >one lines under-usage, and turn the only semi-decent rail line in the UK
> >into another basket case - just like the rest of the network.
>
> But Network Rail *already* manages HS1 on behalf of its current
> owners, London and Continental Railways.

Though of course management is different to ownership, and even if
Network Rail did own HS1 it certainly doesn't necessarily follow that
HS1 would become subject to the same regulatory regime as the (rest of
the) 'National Rail' network owned by Network Rail.

[Mizter T]

On 24 Mar, 19:58, Tony Polson <docnews2...@***************> wrote:

> Mizter T <mizte...@**********> wrote:
>
> >On 23 Mar, 23:02, Tony Polson <docnews2...@***************> wrote:
>
> >> Ar <A...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
> >> >On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 01:56:26 -0700, Mwmbwls wrote:
>
> >> >> The Rail Freight Groups newsletter raises concerns over the future
> >> >> management and ownership of HS1. Considering the protection and funding
> >> >> given to this project over the years and the aspiration for it to form a
> >> >> template for a High Speed Network for the rest of the country surely the
> >> >> infrastructure should now become part of Network Rail's asset base as
> >> >> was always intended before Railtrack's collapse?
>
> >> >Bring HS1 under control of government quango "Network Rail", great idea.
> >> >We'll all happily pay through the nose for the new incomprehensible fare
> >> >structures they would bring in, make sure the system creeks despite the
> >> >one lines under-usage, and turn the only semi-decent rail line in the UK
> >> >into another basket case - just like the rest of the network.
>
> >> But Network Rail *already* manages HS1 on behalf of its current
> >> owners, London and Continental Railways.
>
> >Though of course management is different to ownership, and even if
> >Network Rail did own HS1 it certainly doesn't necessarily follow that
> >HS1 would become subject to the same regulatory regime as the (rest of
> >the) 'National Rail' network owned by Network Rail.
>
> I was merely responding to refute the ridiculous assertions about
> Network Rail that has been made by Ar(se).

Yeah, I didn't really understand his rant either!