Three matters are troubling me this evening.....

[indalo]

Just pondering...as one does occasionally and the following little matters keep troubling me:

1) Why do tory MPs keep telling us that Heathrow needs a third runway?

2) Why do tory MPs keep telling us Britain needs a new high-speed rail link from
London to somewhere north?

3) What's the difference between a Nexus Premium 8-speed hub and the Alfine hub?


Obviously the first two are of no importance to anyone in Britain except certain tory MPs who stand to get huge sums of money in brown envelopes from their friends in the construction industry if they can railroad these things through parliament.

Number 3 is a tricky one for me though. Can anybody explain?


Indalo

 

[Davanti]

Just pondering...as one does occasionally and the following little matters keep troubling me:

3) What's the difference between a Nexus Premium 8-speed hub and the Alfine hub?

Number 3 is a tricky one for me though. Can anybody explain?


Indalo

Spelt differently?

 

[JuicyBike]

Well, both are expensive to change, compared to dérailleurs so no difference there...

 

[flecc]

Yep, number three's answer is they are both the same since there is no Alfine hub. The name Alfine applies to a high end system according to Shimano, i.e. the Nexus hub with Alfine grade shifter etc. Do not confuse this with the earlier upgrades to the 8 speed hubs which made some think the Alfine hub was different, it wasn't.

Shimano have always marketed this way, their derailleur gears being in family sets and the new e-bike system they announced called "Steps" is only sold as a complete system.

As for 1 and 2, I'm not a tory MP or even always a tory voter, but yes, we do need both the third runway and that HS rail link. Both are essential for our future relative prosperity.

 

[indalo]

I'm not a tory MP or even always a tory voter, but yes, we do need both the third runway and that HS rail link. Both are essential for our future relative prosperity.

I'm sorry Flecc but I disagree totally with that statement. There is no need for either and anyone actually reading all the available literature could come to no other conclusion.

The problem is this: On the one hand we have a band of fairly vociferous MPs, mostly tory, who blurt out at every opportunity a script full of propaganda and devoid of fact.

On the other hand, unlike just a few decades ago, we have a population not prepared just to allow government to steamroller major projects through parliament unchallenged. Those who object to HS2 or the third runway at Heathrow have had to work hard and dig deep to produce real facts and evidence to demonstrate exactly how the position of those MPs on those matters is untenable.

I shan't begin to list here the range and number of objections to HS2 but would direct anyone interested to read everything available on the internet, news media and particularly local newspapers in all the areas likely to be affected, were this ridiculously expensive project to succeed.

There are three major planks in the argument: First, there is the business case. Secondly there is the economic case and thirdly, the environmental case. HS2 fails on each of those. There are though, many areas in which we can progress travel and public transport in this small island but none of those areas will ever be funded if we have to pay for HS2.

Indalo

 

[flecc]

It's the third runway for Heathrow that's the one that concerns me most Indalo, and it is necessary, indeed vital. There's no viable alternative acceptable to the business flyers we need and there is no valid reason for not building it.

Indeed if eventually a fourth and even fifth runway become necessary, I'll support those too.

My views will only change when a new way of living in and running this world is shown to be viable, something that sadly hasn't happened yet. For the present we are stuck with the way we have and need to live with it.
.

 

[Woosh]

It's the third runway for Heathrow that's the one that concerns me most Indalo, and it is necessary, indeed vital. There's no viable alternative acceptable to the business flyers we need and there is no valid reason for not building it.

Indeed if eventually a fourth and even fifth runway become necessary, I'll support those too.

My views will only change when a new way of living in and running this world is shown to be viable, something that sadly hasn't happened yet. For the present we are stuck with the way we have and need to live with it.
.

Yes, there is - expand Southend airport.

There is plenty of spare capacity here, air corridors are directly over water.
You step out of the train and walk 150 metres to the check in desks.
We fly from here to Spain last May, 40 minutes to check in and best of all, home in just 15 minutes after the plane landed.
By the way, you can rent electric bikes from Woosh for £4 / hour.

 

[flecc]

No Hatti, Southend isn't London, just as Stanstead and Gatwick aren't either, so that's just another empty argument.

Business flyers during long flight necessitating transfer are not willing to take a train trip between airports and have one or two more hours wasted in all the transfer rigmarole. Heathrow needs more capacity for flights to go direct to all major destinations so that distant transfers are unnecessary. If we don't provide that, the rivals will and our status as the world's financial centre will suffer with a consequential loss of much of our foreign income.

 

[indalo]

Heathrow needs more capacity for flights to go direct to all major destinations so that distant transfers are unnecessary. If we don't provide that, the rivals will and our status as the world's financial centre will suffer with a consequential loss of much of our foreign income.

That looks like a straight lift from a tory propaganda document Flecc. The reality is that that argument is complete balderdash.

Indalo

 

[flecc]

It's what I believed probably before that document was produced and I haven't read it. It's your opinion that it's balderdash, my opinion that the facts support it.

What is your alternative? Another airport, expand elsewhere, or do nothing?

 

[shemozzle999]

They could consider expanding Denham Airdrome, just a few miles from Heathrow or even re-open Croydon.

As long as they offer cheap direct flights to Spain

 

[Woosh]

Easyjet have lots of cheap flights to Spain from S.O.S.!
How about replacing LHR with a new airport in the Thames Estuary?

 

[smudger1956]

Hmmm the 3rd runway again, I can remember looking around BOAC's (G-BOAC I believe) brand new 747, astounded by the size and the very ill fitting inspection panels, and the chap showing us around made a statement that has stayed with me " The only thing about this aircraft, a flight to New York will put out as much pollution as a family car would in 40 years"
Just thought I would share that....

 

[flecc]

or even re-open Croydon.

That would upset drivers. There were traffic lights half way along the runway that cars going west from Croydon had to stop at each time a plane was coming in to land, since the road crossed the runway.

Anyway, it's been turned into a retail park now, so little chance.

 

[flecc]

The only thing about this aircraft, a flight to New York will put out as much pollution as a family car would in 40 years"

That's what I call efficiency, doing something 120 times faster!
.

 

[flecc]

How about replacing LHR with a new airport in the Thames Estuary?

No way. Instead of expanding Heathrow as we should have done we despoiled the beautiful countryside around Stanstead, using top grade farming land and blighting many more lives.

Now you propose despoiling another area and blighting many more lives! No, no, no! Concentrate the blight in the one area where everyone moved into the flight path areas since the airport was built, so have no right to complain anyway.

 

[Kudoscycles]

What's wrong with Manston?It wouldn't take much to extend the existing high speed rail link direct to Stratford and St Pancras. This Thames estuary has a number of big problems-even Boris has ignored the sunk munitions ship which is still too unstable to move,right in the middle of the proposed airfield location.
Also the bird life would not be easy scares away-remember the Hudson river landing.
So many of these decisions seem to be based upon politics rather than common sense.
Dave
Kudoscycles

 

[indalo]

What's wrong with Manston?It wouldn't take much to extend the existing high speed rail link direct to Stratford and St Pancras.
So many of these decisions seem to be based upon politics rather than common sense.
Dave
Kudoscycles

Manston's not a bad call David, especially with its proximity to central London by rail. The most obvious choice is Stansted though as it already has excellent rail and bus services into town, is shamefully under-developed and no population upheaval nor ancient village removal would be required. The airport authority already owns a huge tract of land beyond the existing airport boundaries anyway. Manston, like Southend, Gatwick and Stansted offers reasonably close proximity to the capital and all those places would benefit from further development, indeed many residents in those areas welcome the prospect of an airport in their back yard. You may have seen a TV documentary which revealed some interesting opinions from people over Sheppey way.

You're absolutely right about the political dimension of course. The most learned legal minds in the country ruled that government was wrong on Heathrow expansion after examining all the facts. If some people wish to believe the rhetoric from the likes of Tim Yeo, Richard Branson and others of that ilk rather than accept the judgement of the highest court in the land, then there is little hope for democracy in this country. To listen to some commentators, one could be forgiven for thinking that airlines fly in massive sums of foreign currency into Heathrow which, without another runway, would cause those bankers who do that to divert all their funds to Frankfurt and elsewhere. So, dogma and rhetoric, selective statistics, downright lies, vested interests or.........in a single word, politics is what these things come down to.


As it happens, Lydd airport with its proximity to the Eurostar terminal at Ashford might not be entirely out of the question either in my view. A short rail link like the temporary one built when the power station construction got underway at Dungeness would do the trick.

Indalo

 

[flecc]

I repeat, concentrate the blight in the one area where everyone moved into the flight path areas since the airport was built, so have no right to complain anyway.

What is wrong with expanding Heathrow, it's the obvious thing to do, the lowest cost thing to do, the quickest thing to do, the least disruptive thing to do, the best thing to minimise the number of passenger interchanges necessary, the best thing to do for the remaining interchange passengers and the one village affected directly has had half of the properties bought up by BAA long ago and standing empty. Why won't any of you face up to those facts, but instead want to spend a fortune creating a huge blight elsewhere to have an airport in the wrong place? London's airport needs to be at London.

Indalo, my view has nothing to do with tory propanganda or what that's based upon, it's just simple logic.

 

[Kudoscycles]

Indalo..Lydd would be good call except for the important birdlife wetlands located nearby. The only birds upset by Manston are sunning themselves on Margate beach
Flecc...can't agree with you about Heathrow,every time I fly from LHR I have to leave so much extra time because of the traffic on the M25,any increase in that traffic and it would be at a permanent standstill.Ryanair makes out of town airports work...Memmingen 120 Kms from Munich, Hahn 130 Kms from Frankfurt...there are many such examples.
Dave
Kudoscycles