ChatterBank3 mins ago
Answers
1 to 11 of 11
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by rov1200. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I believe its to encourage passengers who would normally fly to the North an alternative option of doing so by train and also get them there quicker.
The drawback is it has no respect for the areas of outstanding beauty it has to pass through such as the Chilterns as obviously a straight line track would be almost a necessity.
The cost will exceed £30bn and when built only those of wealthy means would be able to use it. Just compare now the daily normal rail trip from the Kyle of Lochalsh to Plymouth would cost you £1000
The drawback is it has no respect for the areas of outstanding beauty it has to pass through such as the Chilterns as obviously a straight line track would be almost a necessity.
The cost will exceed £30bn and when built only those of wealthy means would be able to use it. Just compare now the daily normal rail trip from the Kyle of Lochalsh to Plymouth would cost you £1000
If that is the case why not resite Heathrow to a less invasive site and recommended by Boris Johnston in the Thames estuary?
They could then make use of the current Euro channel link high speed line into London via Ebbsfleet.
This would have multiple benefits.
1. Less disturbance from overflying aircraft for the citizens of London and beyond..
2. Congestion on the M25, M40, M4, M3 and M1 motorways would be relieved
3. Instead of paying £30bn for the high speed line the costs would be less.
4. No invasive land grab to build the line.
5. If a plane passenger wished he could still make the journey.
6. The estuary airport could expand to almost infinitum to cater for future growth.
The current option when the high speed rail line is built in 15-20 years would be unthinkable with the growth of Heathrow and all the surrounding motorways.
The high speed rail link does not exist in a vaccum in this one track policy.
They could then make use of the current Euro channel link high speed line into London via Ebbsfleet.
This would have multiple benefits.
1. Less disturbance from overflying aircraft for the citizens of London and beyond..
2. Congestion on the M25, M40, M4, M3 and M1 motorways would be relieved
3. Instead of paying £30bn for the high speed line the costs would be less.
4. No invasive land grab to build the line.
5. If a plane passenger wished he could still make the journey.
6. The estuary airport could expand to almost infinitum to cater for future growth.
The current option when the high speed rail line is built in 15-20 years would be unthinkable with the growth of Heathrow and all the surrounding motorways.
The high speed rail link does not exist in a vaccum in this one track policy.
Why not make use of the perfectly good underused airport with a long runway, at Manston in Kent? EUJet flew out of there until it went bust, and it still has charter flights and occasional other scheduled flights. The high speed train from St Pancras has a link into the north Kent towns via Ashford. Manston airport is already there - it's the one a lot of relief freight flights leave from, so why build anything new? Lydd airport is also about to be redeveloped down on the south Kent coast, but that has hardly any rail links at all at the moment (I'm sure it will in due course!)
-- answer removed --
>3. Instead of paying £30bn for the high speed line the costs would be less.
And how much do you think it would cost to "move" Heatrow airport.
Probably about the same.
Anyway the high speed rail link is not just for air passengers but for anyone who wants to get round the UK quickly but dones not want to join the queues on the M1 or M6.
And how much do you think it would cost to "move" Heatrow airport.
Probably about the same.
Anyway the high speed rail link is not just for air passengers but for anyone who wants to get round the UK quickly but dones not want to join the queues on the M1 or M6.
Anyway as I said above Boris Johnston was the politician for recommending the Thames estuary for a new London Airport. There have been many discussions on this ever since Ted Heath in the 60's proposed Maplin. Although sanctioned it never went ahead.
As for the high speed line cutting through the Chilterns this has been aired many times on the TV recently and I quite agree with their sentiments.
So my proposal is nothing new but just using some common sense.
As for the high speed line cutting through the Chilterns this has been aired many times on the TV recently and I quite agree with their sentiments.
So my proposal is nothing new but just using some common sense.
It was the 70s. The plan was later abandoned in favour of expanding Stansted, which at that time was used for nothing more than jet commercial pilot training.
But you know what a big deal we Brits make of large-scale planning decisions. It just sucks up politicians time and costs lots of money. Protesting groups determined to have their say stretch things out endlessly. Contrast this to the French who merely say 'zat new rail-link isss goin frew your land, Pierre - here's a few Euros for you'.
So it won't happen.
But you know what a big deal we Brits make of large-scale planning decisions. It just sucks up politicians time and costs lots of money. Protesting groups determined to have their say stretch things out endlessly. Contrast this to the French who merely say 'zat new rail-link isss goin frew your land, Pierre - here's a few Euros for you'.
So it won't happen.
1 to 11 of 11
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles55 mins ago
ChatterBank58 mins ago
Crosswords69 mins ago
ChatterBank103 mins ago
