Search results

Whoosh, you need to do some research. It's all been said before and HS2 considered every conceivable alternative to Euston for a terminus. Problem seems to be NIH. Flaw in appointing HS2 Ltd. in the first place. Not objective enough.

I know peeps who commute to Liverpool from Mold despite the congestion on the A550 in the morning so I think Flint has a claim.

http://www.20milesmore.com/

That would be interesting. If LPL-CHR is 43 minutes, then you would have ex-LS, xx:47 VT direct Euston; xx:04 LM change at Crewe and xx:20 VT via Chester. Gives 3tph of sorts. Almost as good as Manch! The extra VT would displace an ATW shuttle though. What a good move! Methinks any end-to end...

As NSEFAN says. Like Blue Pullman from Manch to St.P. Also, forshortened platforms with scaffold plank access between the platforms whilst the front end was built clear of pax traffic. It was mayhem I can tell you. And traffic was much lighter then. Compare BR's promotional vids then showing...

Stops at Rugby southbound. Monday 16th 0735 ex Chester, we made an unscheduled stop at MK in addition and still arrived at Euston early. How did the driver manage to do this?

Thank you HSTEd. Just a quick look tells me that Kendal to Shap Summit, 15 miles, c585' rise, av. gradient 0.75%. Beattock to Beattock Summit, 9 miles, c650' rise, av. gradient.1.4%. An HST would laugh at these hills. I foresee some heroic earthworks and soaring viaducts to keep the line...

When the first TGV line from Paris-Lyon opened I remember one of their selling points. Since there would be no freight, steeper gradients were acceptable to the TGV stock and there was no need for tunnels. I don't know if that turned out to be true. Have any of the naysayers on here actually...

If you fancy them there, why not? But with the current proposal, it's not necessary. Please do keep up.

16 to 18 years to rebuild Euston is simply not on. To get it done in time to serve HS2, the building programme needs to be 5 to 6 years at most. The only way to achieve this is to avoid complex phased rebuilding of an operating station. A clear site largely separated from the operating railway...

Page 10 also includes this: "It is anticipated that the Interim Report will lead to an “in principle approval” from Government......." They are doing nothing to anticipate the funding from governmint. You would think the author knew the difference between anticipated and expected.

Phew. I'd rather fly!

You're missing the point. Six platforms will take the whole initial service. SW can have Waterloo all to themselves. You're all very good at the negativity bit. Try some positive thought like a solution to Euston that delivers in time for the opening of Ph1.

What, on earth, would you want to do that for? If determined, Merseyrail is there for that.

Quote from 26th November 2014: "StP has what? Four Euro* tph and five international platforms. There are, at least, four suitable platforms extant in London and no suggestion of using them. Extend Euston on the west side only, using the carriage shed space and some significant demolition...

Whilst I have no sympathy for JR, there is, in fact, a mistake in those slides that the Select Committe lapped up. My interest is in the Chester service. Presently it stops at Crewe and Rugby or MK, not Nuneaton as depicted. In 2026 it looks like it's converted to a stopper all the way down...

All sorts can use the airport but some might be weight-limited. It depends on a multitude of factors including ....... pavement bearing capacity, for one!

This is a fruitless argument. LPL will always play second fiddle to MCR simply because of MCR's position in the country and its conectivity. Aaah, we're back to that again. Wind speed and ambient temperature also come into the take-off calculation. Some days you can and some others.... you...

Bristol Lowdeckers were used by Crosville out of New Ferry depot around North Wales as I recall.

Who wrote the franchise agreement?