Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
Sep 20th 2006, 9:31 pm
#31
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
Dave Spencer <[email protected]> wrote:
>In message <[email protected]>, Tony Polson
><[email protected]> writes
>>"Miss L. Toe" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>It put the hovercraft out of business,
>>Nonsense. The hovercraft were put out of business by the high speed
>>catamaran ferries, plus the fact that they were life expired, noisy,
>>uncomfortable and exceptionally expensive to operate because of their
>>extremely high fuel consumption.
>>>and has caused lots of problems for
>>>the ferries.
>>More nonsense! The ferries are carrying more traffic than ever.
>According to the report of the Centre for European, Regional and
>Transport Economics of the University of Kent at
>http://tinyurl.com/hq8zz
>passenger numbers through Kent ports declined from just under 25m in
>1997 to around 17m in 2002.
>Freight carryings through the Port of Calais overcame disruption in
>the early part of the year to recover from June and for the rest of
>2005.
>But throughout the year, passengers using Europe's busiest ferry port,
>continued to fall.
>And from
>http://www.aferry.to/news/viewpost.asp?news=59
>(a propos Calais traffic in 2005)
>"The general decline over recent years in passengers travelling between
>the UK and mainland Europe was underlined, with fewer British day
>trippers visiting Calais. Passenger numbers fell to 11,695,133, an
>overall reduction of 11.8 per cent compared with 2004.
>On the other hand, cross-Channel freight traffic increased by 1.56 per
>cent to a total of 1,651,737 trucks and there was an increase of 2.3 per
>cent in tonnage handled through the commercial port. This was a good
>result in the light of the three month disruption from February until
>June in the Port. It also follows on from an exceptional year in 2004,
>when traffic grew by 12.6 per cent.
>In terms of total tonnage handled by the Port of Calais, this also
>improved to a total of 38.3 million tons, confirming Calais' position as
>the 4th busiest French port behind Marseille, Le Havre and Dunkerque and
>ahead of Nantes-St Nazaire, Rouen and Bordeaux."
>And in case you're wondering what happened in 2003, from the Port of
>Calais at
>http://www.calais-port.com/communiqu...lan2003uk.html
>"While tourist vehicles and freight traffic using the Port of Calais
>remained static, a big drop in coach business led to passenger numbers
>falling by 8.5 per cent to 13.7 million in 2003."
I will happily concede that passenger numbers are down. It would be
strange if that were not the case. The virtual closure of Dover
Western Docks and of the perfectly situated Dover Marine railway
station were devastating blows.
But the fact is that vehicle numbers are up. That is due to the much
larger ferries that have been introduced, plus the investment in new
and much improved facilities at Dover Eastern Docks. The docks are no
longer passenger-friendly but they are continually becoming more
efficient at handling vehicles. The presence of a new low cost
operator has also seen a rise in traffic.
In the planning of the Channel Tunnel bid, it was confidently assumed
that the shuttle services through the tunnel would be so attractive
that the ferry industry would almost die out within three years of the
tunnel opening. Of course it was assumed (so many assumptions!) that
the tunnel fares would be much cheaper than the ferries, and that the
ferries would be unable to compete.
But compete they did, by sharply cutting prices and by even more
aggressive cost cutting that was essential for their survival, let
alone profitability. Rationalisation of the ferry companies has left
behind a smaller number of operators with a far lower cost base than
before, enabling them to compete even more effectively with a Channel
Tunnel that cannot repay even a quarter of the interest on its debt.
The fact is that, if the Channel Tunnel charged fares that fairly
reflected its financial situation, the cost of using the tunnel would
at least double, and hardly anyone would use it.
The ferries don't have the luxury of being able to charge less than
half the economic fare. They would rapidly go out of business whereas
the Channel Tunnel has been allowed to survive despite trading
insolvent from Day 1.
The ferry companies deserve praise for weathering the storm of a cut
price competitor whose bankruptcy is needed urgently to restore some
sense and honesty to the cross channel market.
>In message <[email protected]>, Tony Polson
><[email protected]> writes
>>"Miss L. Toe" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>It put the hovercraft out of business,
>>Nonsense. The hovercraft were put out of business by the high speed
>>catamaran ferries, plus the fact that they were life expired, noisy,
>>uncomfortable and exceptionally expensive to operate because of their
>>extremely high fuel consumption.
>>>and has caused lots of problems for
>>>the ferries.
>>More nonsense! The ferries are carrying more traffic than ever.
>According to the report of the Centre for European, Regional and
>Transport Economics of the University of Kent at
>http://tinyurl.com/hq8zz
>passenger numbers through Kent ports declined from just under 25m in
>1997 to around 17m in 2002.
>Freight carryings through the Port of Calais overcame disruption in
>the early part of the year to recover from June and for the rest of
>2005.
>But throughout the year, passengers using Europe's busiest ferry port,
>continued to fall.
>And from
>http://www.aferry.to/news/viewpost.asp?news=59
>(a propos Calais traffic in 2005)
>"The general decline over recent years in passengers travelling between
>the UK and mainland Europe was underlined, with fewer British day
>trippers visiting Calais. Passenger numbers fell to 11,695,133, an
>overall reduction of 11.8 per cent compared with 2004.
>On the other hand, cross-Channel freight traffic increased by 1.56 per
>cent to a total of 1,651,737 trucks and there was an increase of 2.3 per
>cent in tonnage handled through the commercial port. This was a good
>result in the light of the three month disruption from February until
>June in the Port. It also follows on from an exceptional year in 2004,
>when traffic grew by 12.6 per cent.
>In terms of total tonnage handled by the Port of Calais, this also
>improved to a total of 38.3 million tons, confirming Calais' position as
>the 4th busiest French port behind Marseille, Le Havre and Dunkerque and
>ahead of Nantes-St Nazaire, Rouen and Bordeaux."
>And in case you're wondering what happened in 2003, from the Port of
>Calais at
>http://www.calais-port.com/communiqu...lan2003uk.html
>"While tourist vehicles and freight traffic using the Port of Calais
>remained static, a big drop in coach business led to passenger numbers
>falling by 8.5 per cent to 13.7 million in 2003."
I will happily concede that passenger numbers are down. It would be
strange if that were not the case. The virtual closure of Dover
Western Docks and of the perfectly situated Dover Marine railway
station were devastating blows.
But the fact is that vehicle numbers are up. That is due to the much
larger ferries that have been introduced, plus the investment in new
and much improved facilities at Dover Eastern Docks. The docks are no
longer passenger-friendly but they are continually becoming more
efficient at handling vehicles. The presence of a new low cost
operator has also seen a rise in traffic.
In the planning of the Channel Tunnel bid, it was confidently assumed
that the shuttle services through the tunnel would be so attractive
that the ferry industry would almost die out within three years of the
tunnel opening. Of course it was assumed (so many assumptions!) that
the tunnel fares would be much cheaper than the ferries, and that the
ferries would be unable to compete.
But compete they did, by sharply cutting prices and by even more
aggressive cost cutting that was essential for their survival, let
alone profitability. Rationalisation of the ferry companies has left
behind a smaller number of operators with a far lower cost base than
before, enabling them to compete even more effectively with a Channel
Tunnel that cannot repay even a quarter of the interest on its debt.
The fact is that, if the Channel Tunnel charged fares that fairly
reflected its financial situation, the cost of using the tunnel would
at least double, and hardly anyone would use it.
The ferries don't have the luxury of being able to charge less than
half the economic fare. They would rapidly go out of business whereas
the Channel Tunnel has been allowed to survive despite trading
insolvent from Day 1.
The ferry companies deserve praise for weathering the storm of a cut
price competitor whose bankruptcy is needed urgently to restore some
sense and honesty to the cross channel market.
Sep 20th 2006, 9:35 pm
#32
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Harry" <[email protected]> writes:
> > The "Chunnel" hasn't put the channel ferries or Ryanair out of business
> > has it?
> Ryanair no longer flies between (what it calls) London and Paris, so
> I'd say on this particular route the train has certainly put Ryanair
> out of business.
And BA has stopped Gatwick to Paris services.
news:[email protected]...
> "Harry" <[email protected]> writes:
> > The "Chunnel" hasn't put the channel ferries or Ryanair out of business
> > has it?
> Ryanair no longer flies between (what it calls) London and Paris, so
> I'd say on this particular route the train has certainly put Ryanair
> out of business.
And BA has stopped Gatwick to Paris services.
Sep 20th 2006, 9:35 pm
#33
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
"Richard J." <[email protected]> wrote:
>Tony Polson wrote:
>> "Richard J." <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 20 minutes more to get to St Pancras, but the E* journey will be 20
>>> minutes shorter, so overall there will be no difference in time
>>> (and reliability of E* in the London area should be better).
>> But the extra 20 minutes' journey to St Pancras will involve the
>> Northern Line.
>Not necessarily. Bakerloo to Oxford Circus, with level interchange to
>the Victoria Line is an easier and probably quicker route.
For people who dislike Tube journeys, you are actually suggesting a
further change of train? Amazing! I congratulate you, sir!
>> Compared to the easy interchange at Waterloo, the
>> addition of an unpleasant Tube journey will put many people off.
>You mean they won't go to Paris at all, or they'll put up with an even
>more unpleasant journey by air? Neither seems likely.
They will go to Heathrow, Gatwick or maybe Ebbsfleet.
>Tony Polson wrote:
>> "Richard J." <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 20 minutes more to get to St Pancras, but the E* journey will be 20
>>> minutes shorter, so overall there will be no difference in time
>>> (and reliability of E* in the London area should be better).
>> But the extra 20 minutes' journey to St Pancras will involve the
>> Northern Line.
>Not necessarily. Bakerloo to Oxford Circus, with level interchange to
>the Victoria Line is an easier and probably quicker route.
For people who dislike Tube journeys, you are actually suggesting a
further change of train? Amazing! I congratulate you, sir!
>> Compared to the easy interchange at Waterloo, the
>> addition of an unpleasant Tube journey will put many people off.
>You mean they won't go to Paris at all, or they'll put up with an even
>more unpleasant journey by air? Neither seems likely.
They will go to Heathrow, Gatwick or maybe Ebbsfleet.
Sep 20th 2006, 9:37 pm
#34
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
[email protected] (Jim Ley) wrote:
>I think you have a very different view of the undergroung and of
>flying to me - the underground is something never to enter, especially
>during the summer months or if you have luggage, a bus or drive to
>heathrow or gatwick sit around with a beer catching up on some email
>and a short ride in a plane. Is much more prefable to a hellish
>ungerground and a train where I can't catch up on email.
Exactly so.
In assuming that people will gladly swap an easy interchange at
Waterloo for the horrors of the Underground, Richard displays a
complete lack of understanding of the market.
>I think you have a very different view of the undergroung and of
>flying to me - the underground is something never to enter, especially
>during the summer months or if you have luggage, a bus or drive to
>heathrow or gatwick sit around with a beer catching up on some email
>and a short ride in a plane. Is much more prefable to a hellish
>ungerground and a train where I can't catch up on email.
Exactly so.
In assuming that people will gladly swap an easy interchange at
Waterloo for the horrors of the Underground, Richard displays a
complete lack of understanding of the market.
Sep 20th 2006, 9:38 pm
#35
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
"Gregory Morrow" <[email protected]> wrote:
>gRunge wrote:
>> Oh thank you thank you for opening our eyes and helping us read the news !!
>If I take the train to Paris can I screw Magda...???
Sure ... why don't we all go?
;-)
>gRunge wrote:
>> Oh thank you thank you for opening our eyes and helping us read the news !!
>If I take the train to Paris can I screw Magda...???
Sure ... why don't we all go?
;-)
Sep 20th 2006, 9:41 pm
#36
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
> The ferry companies deserve praise for weathering the storm of a cut
> price competitor whose bankruptcy is needed urgently to restore some
> sense and honesty to the cross channel market.
If the tunnel went bankrupt, do you think 'they' would fill it in ?
No - it would simply be sold by the administrator and a new lower debt
company would take over and bring prices down thus driving the ferries and
competing air routes into further trouble.
> price competitor whose bankruptcy is needed urgently to restore some
> sense and honesty to the cross channel market.
If the tunnel went bankrupt, do you think 'they' would fill it in ?
No - it would simply be sold by the administrator and a new lower debt
company would take over and bring prices down thus driving the ferries and
competing air routes into further trouble.
Sep 20th 2006, 9:44 pm
#37
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:35:08 +0100, "Miss L. Toe"
<[email protected]> wrote:
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> "Harry" <[email protected]> writes:
>> > The "Chunnel" hasn't put the channel ferries or Ryanair out of business
>> > has it?
>> Ryanair no longer flies between (what it calls) London and Paris, so
>> I'd say on this particular route the train has certainly put Ryanair
>> out of business.
>And BA has stopped Gatwick to Paris services.
and direct flights from Manchester to A'dam too?
--
Martin
<[email protected]> wrote:
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> "Harry" <[email protected]> writes:
>> > The "Chunnel" hasn't put the channel ferries or Ryanair out of business
>> > has it?
>> Ryanair no longer flies between (what it calls) London and Paris, so
>> I'd say on this particular route the train has certainly put Ryanair
>> out of business.
>And BA has stopped Gatwick to Paris services.
and direct flights from Manchester to A'dam too?
--
Martin
Sep 20th 2006, 9:57 pm
#38
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:35:08 +0100, "Miss L. Toe"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> ><[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> "Harry" <[email protected]> writes:
> >>
> >> > The "Chunnel" hasn't put the channel ferries or Ryanair out of business
> >> > has it?
> >>
> >> Ryanair no longer flies between (what it calls) London and Paris, so
> >> I'd say on this particular route the train has certainly put Ryanair
> >> out of business.
> >
> >And BA has stopped Gatwick to Paris services.
> >
>
> and direct flights from Manchester to A'dam too?
If it has, that wouldn't be because of trains- but stiff competition
with airlines. Both Liverpool and Manchester have low-cost alternatives
to fly to Amsterdam, and I'd imagine most connecting flights would be on
KLM?
--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
http://www.davidhorne.net/pictures.html http://soundjunction.org
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:35:08 +0100, "Miss L. Toe"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> ><[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> "Harry" <[email protected]> writes:
> >>
> >> > The "Chunnel" hasn't put the channel ferries or Ryanair out of business
> >> > has it?
> >>
> >> Ryanair no longer flies between (what it calls) London and Paris, so
> >> I'd say on this particular route the train has certainly put Ryanair
> >> out of business.
> >
> >And BA has stopped Gatwick to Paris services.
> >
>
> and direct flights from Manchester to A'dam too?
If it has, that wouldn't be because of trains- but stiff competition
with airlines. Both Liverpool and Manchester have low-cost alternatives
to fly to Amsterdam, and I'd imagine most connecting flights would be on
KLM?
--
David Horne- http://www.davidhorne.net
usenet (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk
http://www.davidhorne.net/pictures.html http://soundjunction.org
Sep 20th 2006, 10:02 pm
#39
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:57:25 +0100,
[email protected] (David Horne, _the_ chancellor of
the royal duchy of city south and deansgate) wrote:
>Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:35:08 +0100, "Miss L. Toe"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> ><[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected]...
>> >> "Harry" <[email protected]> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > The "Chunnel" hasn't put the channel ferries or Ryanair out of business
>> >> > has it?
>> >>
>> >> Ryanair no longer flies between (what it calls) London and Paris, so
>> >> I'd say on this particular route the train has certainly put Ryanair
>> >> out of business.
>> >
>> >And BA has stopped Gatwick to Paris services.
>> >
>>
>> and direct flights from Manchester to A'dam too?
>If it has, that wouldn't be because of trains- but stiff competition
>with airlines. Both Liverpool and Manchester have low-cost alternatives
>to fly to Amsterdam, and I'd imagine most connecting flights would be on
>KLM?
I only asked because when I searched for a flight all the BA flights
Manchester to A'dam were via London.
Around 5 or 6 years ago BA e-ticket was consistently the cheapest
flight from the Manchester area to A'dam, including using Easyjet from
Liverpool taking into account getting to the airports by train from
Huddersfield.
--
Martin
[email protected] (David Horne, _the_ chancellor of
the royal duchy of city south and deansgate) wrote:
>Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:35:08 +0100, "Miss L. Toe"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> ><[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected]...
>> >> "Harry" <[email protected]> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > The "Chunnel" hasn't put the channel ferries or Ryanair out of business
>> >> > has it?
>> >>
>> >> Ryanair no longer flies between (what it calls) London and Paris, so
>> >> I'd say on this particular route the train has certainly put Ryanair
>> >> out of business.
>> >
>> >And BA has stopped Gatwick to Paris services.
>> >
>>
>> and direct flights from Manchester to A'dam too?
>If it has, that wouldn't be because of trains- but stiff competition
>with airlines. Both Liverpool and Manchester have low-cost alternatives
>to fly to Amsterdam, and I'd imagine most connecting flights would be on
>KLM?
I only asked because when I searched for a flight all the BA flights
Manchester to A'dam were via London.
Around 5 or 6 years ago BA e-ticket was consistently the cheapest
flight from the Manchester area to A'dam, including using Easyjet from
Liverpool taking into account getting to the airports by train from
Huddersfield.
--
Martin
Sep 20th 2006, 10:20 pm
#40
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
On 20 Sep 2006 22:20:24 -0700, in rec.travel.europe, "Gregory Morrow"
<[email protected]> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
...
... gRunge wrote:
...
... > Oh thank you thank you for opening our eyes and helping us read the news !!
...
...
... If I take the train to Paris can I screw Magda...???
No, you cannot.
<[email protected]> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
...
... gRunge wrote:
...
... > Oh thank you thank you for opening our eyes and helping us read the news !!
...
...
... If I take the train to Paris can I screw Magda...???
No, you cannot.
Sep 20th 2006, 11:12 pm
#41
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 12:20:28 +0200, Magda <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 20 Sep 2006 22:20:24 -0700, in rec.travel.europe, "Gregory Morrow"
><[email protected]> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
> ...
> ... gRunge wrote:
> ...
> ... > Oh thank you thank you for opening our eyes and helping us read the news !!
> ...
> ...
> ... If I take the train to Paris can I screw Magda...???
>No, you cannot.
That's a relief, especially for Greg.
--
Martin
>On 20 Sep 2006 22:20:24 -0700, in rec.travel.europe, "Gregory Morrow"
><[email protected]> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
> ...
> ... gRunge wrote:
> ...
> ... > Oh thank you thank you for opening our eyes and helping us read the news !!
> ...
> ...
> ... If I take the train to Paris can I screw Magda...???
>No, you cannot.
That's a relief, especially for Greg.
--
Martin
Sep 20th 2006, 11:46 pm
#42
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
"Miss L. Toe" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The ferry companies deserve praise for weathering the storm of a cut
>> price competitor whose bankruptcy is needed urgently to restore some
>> sense and honesty to the cross channel market.
>If the tunnel went bankrupt, do you think 'they' would fill it in ?
>No - it would simply be sold by the administrator and a new lower debt
>company would take over and bring prices down thus driving the ferries and
>competing air routes into further trouble.
The high operating costs and the need to service some level of debt
will ensure that Eurotunnel can never "drive the ferries into further
trouble".
The fares charged now are not sufficient to service even a quarter of
the original debt, not by a long way. You can be sure that the Tunnel
will neither be sold for anything significantly less, nor be allowed
to operate without servicing a significant amount of debt.
The current operating surplus is a whole order of magnitude less than
the forecast figure, and that was before the cost of building and
financing the tunnel rose by a factor of more than 2.5.
>> The ferry companies deserve praise for weathering the storm of a cut
>> price competitor whose bankruptcy is needed urgently to restore some
>> sense and honesty to the cross channel market.
>If the tunnel went bankrupt, do you think 'they' would fill it in ?
>No - it would simply be sold by the administrator and a new lower debt
>company would take over and bring prices down thus driving the ferries and
>competing air routes into further trouble.
The high operating costs and the need to service some level of debt
will ensure that Eurotunnel can never "drive the ferries into further
trouble".
The fares charged now are not sufficient to service even a quarter of
the original debt, not by a long way. You can be sure that the Tunnel
will neither be sold for anything significantly less, nor be allowed
to operate without servicing a significant amount of debt.
The current operating surplus is a whole order of magnitude less than
the forecast figure, and that was before the cost of building and
financing the tunnel rose by a factor of more than 2.5.
Sep 21st 2006, 12:34 am
#43
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
"Ian F." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Excellent point. But surely train travel to London will never be truly
> "cheap"?
Every time I travel by Eurostar I purchase an International Apex, therefore
I can travel to any station in Belgium from Cardiff for �84. I don't
consider that excessive.
Roger
news:[email protected]...
> Excellent point. But surely train travel to London will never be truly
> "cheap"?
Every time I travel by Eurostar I purchase an International Apex, therefore
I can travel to any station in Belgium from Cardiff for �84. I don't
consider that excessive.
Roger
Sep 21st 2006, 12:40 am
#44
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
"Jim Ley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 01:12:19 GMT, "Richard J."
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think you have a very different view of the undergroung and of
> flying to me - the underground is something never to enter, especially
> during the summer months or if you have luggage, a bus or drive to
> heathrow or gatwick sit around with a beer catching up on some email
> and a short ride in a plane. Is much more prefable to a hellish
> ungerground and a train where I can't catch up on email.
You can catch up on email on the plane? You're happy to pay the excessive
car parking charges at Heathrow or Gatwick? You're happy to drive to
Heathrow and Gatwick?
You drink the beer (fizzy crap) at Heathrow or Gatwick?
And most underground journeys are 20 minutes at both. I don't find
Paddington to Waterloo hellish, nor will Paddington to St Pancras be
Hellish.
I wonder what your interest in railways can be?
Roger
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 01:12:19 GMT, "Richard J."
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think you have a very different view of the undergroung and of
> flying to me - the underground is something never to enter, especially
> during the summer months or if you have luggage, a bus or drive to
> heathrow or gatwick sit around with a beer catching up on some email
> and a short ride in a plane. Is much more prefable to a hellish
> ungerground and a train where I can't catch up on email.
You can catch up on email on the plane? You're happy to pay the excessive
car parking charges at Heathrow or Gatwick? You're happy to drive to
Heathrow and Gatwick?
You drink the beer (fizzy crap) at Heathrow or Gatwick?
And most underground journeys are 20 minutes at both. I don't find
Paddington to Waterloo hellish, nor will Paddington to St Pancras be
Hellish.
I wonder what your interest in railways can be?
Roger
Sep 21st 2006, 12:41 am
#45
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Times: Train that changed a nation celebrates its 25th anniversary
In misc.transport.rail.europe Tony Polson <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Richard J." <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Tony Polson wrote:
> >> "Richard J." <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 20 minutes more to get to St Pancras, but the E* journey will be 20
> >>> minutes shorter, so overall there will be no difference in time
> >>> (and reliability of E* in the London area should be better).
> >>
> >>
> >> But the extra 20 minutes' journey to St Pancras will involve the
> >> Northern Line.
> >
> >Not necessarily. Bakerloo to Oxford Circus, with level interchange to
> >the Victoria Line is an easier and probably quicker route.
>
> For people who dislike Tube journeys, you are actually suggesting a
> further change of train? Amazing! I congratulate you, sir!
>
> >> Compared to the easy interchange at Waterloo, the
> >> addition of an unpleasant Tube journey will put many people off.
> >
> >You mean they won't go to Paris at all, or they'll put up with an even
> >more unpleasant journey by air? Neither seems likely.
>
> They will go to Heathrow, Gatwick or maybe Ebbsfleet.
>
... and they go to heathrow by, er, Underground?
--
Chris Green
> "Richard J." <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Tony Polson wrote:
> >> "Richard J." <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 20 minutes more to get to St Pancras, but the E* journey will be 20
> >>> minutes shorter, so overall there will be no difference in time
> >>> (and reliability of E* in the London area should be better).
> >>
> >>
> >> But the extra 20 minutes' journey to St Pancras will involve the
> >> Northern Line.
> >
> >Not necessarily. Bakerloo to Oxford Circus, with level interchange to
> >the Victoria Line is an easier and probably quicker route.
>
> For people who dislike Tube journeys, you are actually suggesting a
> further change of train? Amazing! I congratulate you, sir!
>
> >> Compared to the easy interchange at Waterloo, the
> >> addition of an unpleasant Tube journey will put many people off.
> >
> >You mean they won't go to Paris at all, or they'll put up with an even
> >more unpleasant journey by air? Neither seems likely.
>
> They will go to Heathrow, Gatwick or maybe Ebbsfleet.
>
... and they go to heathrow by, er, Underground?
--
Chris Green
