Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 11:10am Wed 16 Apr 08
Funny how all the money was in place for the Crossrail project in London
Glasgow?
Three phases?
[quote]We understand the Government doesn't have a bottomless pit of money each financial year and that's why our offer is to phase the project[/quote]
So why has the government been pouring millions into bottomless pits for so many years?
Typical!
Funny how all the money was in place for the Crossrail project in London
Glasgow?
Three phases?
We understand the Government doesn't have a bottomless pit of money each financial year and that's why our offer is to phase the project
So why has the government been pouring millions into bottomless pits for so many years?
Typical!
Posted by: jim, Glasgow on 11:21am Wed 16 Apr 08
I agree ,It should be done .But in stages!
I agree ,It should be done .But in stages!
Posted by: talorthane on 11:28am Wed 16 Apr 08
I wonder why Bill Butler didn't think to mention this before the budget was discussed and then approved.
I wonder why Bill Butler didn't think to mention this before the budget was discussed and then approved.
Posted by: Meep, Shawlands on 11:33am Wed 16 Apr 08
If Labour are claiming there is no money for the Glasgow Crossrail, then this is going to play into the hands of the SNP over their claims that "treasury" money being raised in Scotland is not being used here. If Crossrail is going to be such a sore point how the hell are the politicans going to address the need for a Glasgow wide metropolitan subway system?! Some heads need to be banged together pronto.
If Labour are claiming there is no money for the Glasgow Crossrail, then this is going to play into the hands of the SNP over their claims that "treasury" money being raised in Scotland is not being used here. If Crossrail is going to be such a sore point how the hell are the politicans going to address the need for a Glasgow wide metropolitan subway system?! Some heads need to be banged together pronto.
Posted by: jim, Glasgow on 11:37am Wed 16 Apr 08
Ive got a sneaky feeling The Edinburgh Airport train station will be back on the agenda!
Ive got a sneaky feeling The Edinburgh Airport train station will be back on the agenda!
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 11:39am Wed 16 Apr 08
[quote][bold]jim[/bold] wrote:
I agree ,It should be done .But in stages! [/quote] Are you kidding Jim? You've been banging on about this for a quite a while now and you want it done in stages?
You're enthusiasm seems to be waning a little!
jim wrote:
I agree ,It should be done .But in stages!
Are you kidding Jim? You've been banging on about this for a quite a while now and you want it done in stages?
You're enthusiasm seems to be waning a little!
Posted by: jim, Glasgow on 11:59am Wed 16 Apr 08
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]jim[/bold] wrote: I agree ,It should be done .But in stages! [/quote] Are you kidding Jim? You've been banging on about this for a quite a while now and you want it done in stages? You're enthusiasm seems to be waning a little![/quote] Im just surprised that they want it done in stages thats all!
The Missing City wrote:
jim wrote: I agree ,It should be done .But in stages!
Are you kidding Jim? You've been banging on about this for a quite a while now and you want it done in stages? You're enthusiasm seems to be waning a little!
Im just surprised that they want it done in stages thats all!
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 12:14pm Wed 16 Apr 08
[quote][bold]jim[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]jim[/bold] wrote: I agree ,It should be done .But in stages! [/quote] Are you kidding Jim? You've been banging on about this for a quite a while now and you want it done in stages? You're enthusiasm seems to be waning a little![/quote] Im just surprised that they want it done in stages thats all![/quote] You should have put a wee question mark at the end of the word [italic]stages[/italic], you had me wondering! ;-)
jim wrote:
The Missing City wrote: jim wrote: I agree ,It should be done .But in stages!
Are you kidding Jim? You've been banging on about this for a quite a while now and you want it done in stages? You're enthusiasm seems to be waning a little!
Im just surprised that they want it done in stages thats all!
You should have put a wee question mark at the end of the word
stages, you had me wondering! ;-)
Posted by: swiss scottish, Argyll on 12:56pm Wed 16 Apr 08
Same guys commenting with the same negativity all the time. DO YOU GUYS HAVE A JOB! It is your negativity and armchair critic approach that hinders the future!!
Same guys commenting with the same negativity all the time. DO YOU GUYS HAVE A JOB! It is your negativity and armchair critic approach that hinders the future!!
Posted by: WeeNed, Glesga on 1:08pm Wed 16 Apr 08
a dunno, this is gonny disrupt wan o ma main revenue streams. whos gonny gie me ten pence furra cup a drugs (a mean tea) when they dont huv tae walk between the stations.
a think mibbe me an the romanians shood go oan strike an stoap begging for a coupla days, see how ye like it when ye canny get yer big issue EH!
a dunno, this is gonny disrupt wan o ma main revenue streams. whos gonny gie me ten pence furra cup a drugs (a mean tea) when they dont huv tae walk between the stations.
a think mibbe me an the romanians shood go oan strike an stoap begging for a coupla days, see how ye like it when ye canny get yer big issue EH!
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 1:22pm Wed 16 Apr 08
[quote][bold]swiss scottish[/bold] wrote:
Same guys commenting with the same negativity all the time. DO YOU GUYS HAVE A JOB! It is your negativity and armchair critic approach that hinders the future!! [/quote] Hope your not referring to Jim, he's been wanting this done for years, so have I but not as much as Jim.
Besides, we are not the one's who are in control, or been part of the control regime for the past 30-odd years, otherwise, this may have happened a long time ago - possibly when they re-opened the low level line under Argyle St.
swiss scottish wrote:
Same guys commenting with the same negativity all the time. DO YOU GUYS HAVE A JOB! It is your negativity and armchair critic approach that hinders the future!!
Hope your not referring to Jim, he's been wanting this done for years, so have I but not as much as Jim.
Besides, we are not the one's who are in control, or been part of the control regime for the past 30-odd years, otherwise, this may have happened a long time ago - possibly when they re-opened the low level line under Argyle St.
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 1:44pm Wed 16 Apr 08
Trouble with this plan is that it takes passengers away from Glasgow Central, where many want to go, on a slow tour of the Gorbals and the inner East End, where they don't. OK, it MAY end up in Glasgow Queen Street Low Level eventually but it would have been much quicker to go to Central and walk...
The scheme "would allow commuters from Ayrshire and the south to travel to Glasgow and on to Edinburgh and beyond without having to change stations". Yes but you'd certainly have to change trains, and it wouldn't be any quicker.
it's big and scary but a tunnel under the Clyde is what's needed.
Trouble with this plan is that it takes passengers away from Glasgow Central, where many want to go, on a slow tour of the Gorbals and the inner East End, where they don't. OK, it MAY end up in Glasgow Queen Street Low Level eventually but it would have been much quicker to go to Central and walk...
The scheme "would allow commuters from Ayrshire and the south to travel to Glasgow and on to Edinburgh and beyond without having to change stations". Yes but you'd certainly have to change trains, and it wouldn't be any quicker.
it's big and scary but a tunnel under the Clyde is what's needed.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 2:00pm Wed 16 Apr 08
[quote]it's big and scary but a tunnel under the Clyde is what's needed.[/quote]
Well in reality, that's never going to happen
Besides, there's more to Scotland than just Ayrshire, you're being as negative about this as the Labour and Tory Politicians who have hindered over this.
If its no use, why was it ever built by these seemingly dumb Victorians?
And why do you have a negative viepoint of the time it would take to wind a train around Glasgow Cross? Do you think its better that we were held back and the whole lot of the line should be demolished instead?
I reckon it takes about 5 minutes to get into Central after the signals have allowed you to do so (If there are no points failure), once your off the train and through the barrier check and out onto Gordon St that's another 5 minutes, then you have a walk from there to Queen St (provided you know where you are going) so that's another 5-10 minutes depending on how well you know the area.
All in all a 15-20 minute kafuffle from West St to Queen St
I reckon Crossrail can do it in under half the time
If not, do you think it would be better to repalce the line with a motorway to link the M74 up with the East End Regeneration Route?
it's big and scary but a tunnel under the Clyde is what's needed.
Well in reality, that's never going to happen
Besides, there's more to Scotland than just Ayrshire, you're being as negative about this as the Labour and Tory Politicians who have hindered over this.
If its no use, why was it ever built by these seemingly dumb Victorians?
And why do you have a negative viepoint of the time it would take to wind a train around Glasgow Cross? Do you think its better that we were held back and the whole lot of the line should be demolished instead?
I reckon it takes about 5 minutes to get into Central after the signals have allowed you to do so (If there are no points failure), once your off the train and through the barrier check and out onto Gordon St that's another 5 minutes, then you have a walk from there to Queen St (provided you know where you are going) so that's another 5-10 minutes depending on how well you know the area.
All in all a 15-20 minute kafuffle from West St to Queen St
I reckon Crossrail can do it in under half the time
If not, do you think it would be better to repalce the line with a motorway to link the M74 up with the East End Regeneration Route?
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 2:31pm Wed 16 Apr 08
Not sure I'd agree with your timings, TMC. Crossrail involves 4 additional station stops and a very tight curve at High Street.
I'm not sure what services the Victorians ran. In those days it was all competing companies and very little (intentional) integration - hence why we had several Glasgow termini, not just the two!
The big issue with Crossrail is that it probably disconnects more than it connects. Sure you can see some advantages - but I think the disadvantages outweigh them. So many people arrive into Central - Crossrail would deprive them of a whole range of connections. if you wanted to go from anywhere in S or SE Glasgow or Lanarkshire to anywhere in Renfrewshire or Ayrshire, for example: Crossrail makes that more difficult. Also, Central is so much at the heart of the city, and is well-placed for suppporting the riverside regeneration. Taking workers away from there, and the main office district isn't helpful.
The M74 is going to meet the EERRoute, I think - at Shawlfield...
I suspect you're right about the tunnel though!
Not sure I'd agree with your timings, TMC. Crossrail involves 4 additional station stops and a very tight curve at High Street.
I'm not sure what services the Victorians ran. In those days it was all competing companies and very little (intentional) integration - hence why we had several Glasgow termini, not just the two!
The big issue with Crossrail is that it probably disconnects more than it connects. Sure you can see some advantages - but I think the disadvantages outweigh them. So many people arrive into Central - Crossrail would deprive them of a whole range of connections. if you wanted to go from anywhere in S or SE Glasgow or Lanarkshire to anywhere in Renfrewshire or Ayrshire, for example: Crossrail makes that more difficult. Also, Central is so much at the heart of the city, and is well-placed for suppporting the riverside regeneration. Taking workers away from there, and the main office district isn't helpful.
The M74 is going to meet the EERRoute, I think - at Shawlfield...
I suspect you're right about the tunnel though!
Posted by: SunnyJhim, South of the River on 3:20pm Wed 16 Apr 08
Linking the entire south and west of Scotland to the north, west and east in terms of the Country's rail network must be the biggest no-brainer in the history of transport infrastructure no-brainers anywhere in the whole UK.
Missing City - you are correct. It is unlikely the necessary £500m to £1b would ever now be found to ram a tunnel under Glasgow giving access to Central and QST on the same route. Had the political will ever truly been there, engineering difficulties aside, that is precisely what SHOULD have happened; connecting the entire 5 million population DIRECTLY into all our major rail stations.
I find it quite ironic that some time ago, in an effort to keep this project alive, SPT redrew support for the tunnel option based on cost and 'practicality'. I say ironic because without being an accountant I'd take an educated guess and say the £-for-£ business case/return on investment potential from a Glasgow Crossrail Tunnel connecting the ENTIRE Scottish rail network must far outstrip same £-for-£ analysis generated by any Glasgow-specific subway expansion at similar cost...which is the current SPT 'pet project'. It's not that I'm against the latter - I'm absolutley for expansion of the fixed rail network all over Scotland. I just don't get the logic in supporting the engineering endeavour in one and not the other.
I believe prevarication on the 'best model' and watering down of expectations in relation to having the BEST possible link partly explains why decison-makers in Edinburgh and Whitehall failed to deliver on the this project for so long; they were given the opportunity to determine that this was not a 'genuine' Scottish transport priority; when in fact it easily ranks alongside high speed links between Edinburgh/Glasgow and England.
Linking the entire south and west of Scotland to the north, west and east in terms of the Country's rail network must be the biggest no-brainer in the history of transport infrastructure no-brainers anywhere in the whole UK.
Missing City - you are correct. It is unlikely the necessary £500m to £1b would ever now be found to ram a tunnel under Glasgow giving access to Central and QST on the same route. Had the political will ever truly been there, engineering difficulties aside, that is precisely what SHOULD have happened; connecting the entire 5 million population DIRECTLY into all our major rail stations.
I find it quite ironic that some time ago, in an effort to keep this project alive, SPT redrew support for the tunnel option based on cost and 'practicality'. I say ironic because without being an accountant I'd take an educated guess and say the £-for-£ business case/return on investment potential from a Glasgow Crossrail Tunnel connecting the ENTIRE Scottish rail network must far outstrip same £-for-£ analysis generated by any Glasgow-specific subway expansion at similar cost...which is the current SPT 'pet project'. It's not that I'm against the latter - I'm absolutley for expansion of the fixed rail network all over Scotland. I just don't get the logic in supporting the engineering endeavour in one and not the other.
I believe prevarication on the 'best model' and watering down of expectations in relation to having the BEST possible link partly explains why decison-makers in Edinburgh and Whitehall failed to deliver on the this project for so long; they were given the opportunity to determine that this was not a 'genuine' Scottish transport priority; when in fact it easily ranks alongside high speed links between Edinburgh/Glasgow and England.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 3:31pm Wed 16 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
Not sure I'd agree with your timings, TMC. Crossrail involves 4 additional station stops and a very tight curve at High Street. I'm not sure what services the Victorians ran. In those days it was all competing companies and very little (intentional) integration - hence why we had several Glasgow termini, not just the two! The big issue with Crossrail is that it probably disconnects more than it connects. Sure you can see some advantages - but I think the disadvantages outweigh them. So many people arrive into Central - Crossrail would deprive them of a whole range of connections. if you wanted to go from anywhere in S or SE Glasgow or Lanarkshire to anywhere in Renfrewshire or Ayrshire, for example: Crossrail makes that more difficult. Also, Central is so much at the heart of the city, and is well-placed for suppporting the riverside regeneration. Taking workers away from there, and the main office district isn't helpful. The M74 is going to meet the EERRoute, I think - at Shawlfield... I suspect you're right about the tunnel though![/quote] [quote]if you wanted to go from anywhere in S or SE Glasgow or Lanarkshire to anywhere in Renfrewshire or Ayrshire, for example: Crossrail makes that more difficult.[/quote]
There is a line for that already, Brad, runs past Shields Depot, past Kilbirnie St - under Eglinton Toll and joins the line coming from Central out to Rutherglen (freight line, but it could be used for passengers)
This is the missing piece of the transport jigsaw!
For the railways at least!
Brad wrote:
Not sure I'd agree with your timings, TMC. Crossrail involves 4 additional station stops and a very tight curve at High Street. I'm not sure what services the Victorians ran. In those days it was all competing companies and very little (intentional) integration - hence why we had several Glasgow termini, not just the two! The big issue with Crossrail is that it probably disconnects more than it connects. Sure you can see some advantages - but I think the disadvantages outweigh them. So many people arrive into Central - Crossrail would deprive them of a whole range of connections. if you wanted to go from anywhere in S or SE Glasgow or Lanarkshire to anywhere in Renfrewshire or Ayrshire, for example: Crossrail makes that more difficult. Also, Central is so much at the heart of the city, and is well-placed for suppporting the riverside regeneration. Taking workers away from there, and the main office district isn't helpful. The M74 is going to meet the EERRoute, I think - at Shawlfield... I suspect you're right about the tunnel though!
if you wanted to go from anywhere in S or SE Glasgow or Lanarkshire to anywhere in Renfrewshire or Ayrshire, for example: Crossrail makes that more difficult.
There is a line for that already, Brad, runs past Shields Depot, past Kilbirnie St - under Eglinton Toll and joins the line coming from Central out to Rutherglen (freight line, but it could be used for passengers)
This is the missing piece of the transport jigsaw!
For the railways at least!
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 3:33pm Wed 16 Apr 08
The M74 will link up with the EERR on Polmadie Road just up from the Oatlands development where the West Coast line sits just at Polamadie Rail Depot.
The M74 will link up with the EERR on Polmadie Road just up from the Oatlands development where the West Coast line sits just at Polamadie Rail Depot.
Posted by: steve4349, larbet on 3:55pm Wed 16 Apr 08
eh,why did labour no build it when they were in power,if london can get crossrail,high speed channel tunnel link,massive redevelopment of transport links for the olympics, glasgow should get its link, and what have our labour m p s being doing in westminster the past 10 years to get the additional funding into the scottish budgets, so why has glasgow has not had its share of the big tranport pie
eh,why did labour no build it when they were in power,if london can get crossrail,high speed channel tunnel link,massive redevelopment of transport links for the olympics, glasgow should get its link, and what have our labour m p s being doing in westminster the past 10 years to get the additional funding into the scottish budgets, so why has glasgow has not had its share of the big tranport pie
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 3:57pm Wed 16 Apr 08
But if you start diverting trains from the S and SE so they don't go to Central (or the city centre) and you're also diverting trains from the W via Crossrail, which trains WILL go to Central (currently Scotland's busiest station)?!
But if you start diverting trains from the S and SE so they don't go to Central (or the city centre) and you're also diverting trains from the W via Crossrail, which trains WILL go to Central (currently Scotland's busiest station)?!
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 4:05pm Wed 16 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
But if you start diverting trains from the S and SE so they don't go to Central (or the city centre) and you're also diverting trains from the W via Crossrail, which trains WILL go to Central (currently Scotland's busiest station)?![/quote] All trains go into Central as it stands - there is a curve at Rutherglen Junction to take you to low level, there also used to be a line that spurred off this to take you over Dalmarnock Road (Bridge is still there, but the line isn't) that's been taken away for the EERR which could have linked up with the Airdrie/Bathgate line and for providing a loop all around Glasgow
However, Crossrail gives trains moire opprtunity to go further afield - if its good enough for London, why is it not good enough for us?
Brad wrote:
But if you start diverting trains from the S and SE so they don't go to Central (or the city centre) and you're also diverting trains from the W via Crossrail, which trains WILL go to Central (currently Scotland's busiest station)?!
All trains go into Central as it stands - there is a curve at Rutherglen Junction to take you to low level, there also used to be a line that spurred off this to take you over Dalmarnock Road (Bridge is still there, but the line isn't) that's been taken away for the EERR which could have linked up with the Airdrie/Bathgate line and for providing a loop all around Glasgow
However, Crossrail gives trains moire opprtunity to go further afield - if its good enough for London, why is it not good enough for us?
Posted by: Brad, Glasgow on 4:29pm Wed 16 Apr 08
My point is far FEWER trains will go into Central if your ideas are implemented.
London and its Crossrail are completely different kettles of fish - only the name is similar! There's also a lot of private money going into LDN's scheme - I don't hear many businesses here clammering for Crossrail, let alone offering to pay for it.
Anyway, no-one's listening to us, except ourselves!
My point is far FEWER trains will go into Central if your ideas are implemented.
London and its Crossrail are completely different kettles of fish - only the name is similar! There's also a lot of private money going into LDN's scheme - I don't hear many businesses here clammering for Crossrail, let alone offering to pay for it.
Anyway, no-one's listening to us, except ourselves!
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 4:43pm Wed 16 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
My point is far FEWER trains will go into Central if your ideas are implemented. London and its Crossrail are completely different kettles of fish - only the name is similar! There's also a lot of private money going into LDN's scheme - I don't hear many businesses here clammering for Crossrail, let alone offering to pay for it. Anyway, no-one's listening to us, except ourselves![/quote] Sure Central is already choked to the gunnells with trains Brad, still the advent of even more trains as with the GARL would provide more train traffic yes, but offering alernatives would be an advantage to the travelling public.
Some MP's as well as the MSP's who are arguing the case for it actually have a point (Dare I say it) even Charles Gordon approved of its benefits when he was part of the old SPTE board in the early 1990's which also mooted the Strathclyde Tram project!
Come to think of it, how many businesses have ploughed cash into the GARL project or the Aidrie/Bathgate/Edin
burgh project?
This project could really join up journeys.
I agree that London has more of a population and is far more built up than what Glasgow is (considering we were told years ago by the masters in London that this was unhealthy) yes they were right... It left us in a right state!
Brad wrote:
My point is far FEWER trains will go into Central if your ideas are implemented. London and its Crossrail are completely different kettles of fish - only the name is similar! There's also a lot of private money going into LDN's scheme - I don't hear many businesses here clammering for Crossrail, let alone offering to pay for it. Anyway, no-one's listening to us, except ourselves!
Sure Central is already choked to the gunnells with trains Brad, still the advent of even more trains as with the GARL would provide more train traffic yes, but offering alernatives would be an advantage to the travelling public.
Some MP's as well as the MSP's who are arguing the case for it actually have a point (Dare I say it) even Charles Gordon approved of its benefits when he was part of the old SPTE board in the early 1990's which also mooted the Strathclyde Tram project!
Come to think of it, how many businesses have ploughed cash into the GARL project or the Aidrie/Bathgate/Edin
burgh project?
This project could really join up journeys.
I agree that London has more of a population and is far more built up than what Glasgow is (considering we were told years ago by the masters in London that this was unhealthy) yes they were right... It left us in a right state!
Posted by: Balliol II, East Lothian on 5:11pm Wed 16 Apr 08
Have I missed something? I thought the Transport Minister was Stewart Stephenson and that Stewart Maxwell was a west of Scotland MSP.
Have I missed something? I thought the Transport Minister was Stewart Stephenson and that Stewart Maxwell was a west of Scotland MSP.
Posted by: Bill Forbes, Cambuslang on 5:45pm Wed 16 Apr 08
Heh, heh, too true Balliol. Perhaps the reason they have not been able to advance CrossRail is that they have been asking the wrong person for the money! Typical!
But seriously, it’s good to see that CrossRail is again being pushed to the fore and for a change there is some common sense in this approach. At last they are going to build it in phases. (Now I wonder who could have suggested that?)
They have even updated the CrossRail web site! Hoorah! And Bob Wylie has produced Newsletter No.2 (no need to rush for a copy – its just the same as Issue 1).
But still the project is jeopardised by the lack of detailed costs. How can they boast about benefits without having a proper handle on cost?
[bold]www.subway2020.com[/bold]
Heh, heh, too true Balliol. Perhaps the reason they have not been able to advance CrossRail is that they have been asking the wrong person for the money! Typical!
But seriously, it’s good to see that CrossRail is again being pushed to the fore and for a change there is some common sense in this approach. At last they are going to build it in phases. (Now I wonder who could have suggested that?)
They have even updated the CrossRail web site! Hoorah! And Bob Wylie has produced Newsletter No.2 (no need to rush for a copy – its just the same as Issue 1).
But still the project is jeopardised by the lack of detailed costs. How can they boast about benefits without having a proper handle on cost?
www.subway2020.com Posted by: Steve L, Cambuslang on 7:41pm Wed 16 Apr 08
I've been watching the Crossrail situation for a while, and personally I don't see the benefits.
Yes, it completes the Scottish rail 'jigsaw'. But what good is a jigsaw if nobody wants to play with it?
Do we have commitment for services from Ayrshire to Perth for example? Doubtful.
Most transport systems are based on a hub and spoke system; which don't necessarily assume that all spokes are interconnected.
Why not build some sort of underground travelator link between GLC and GLQ? The stations are geographically too close to justify such a roundabout new route.
TMC's timings to get from GLC to GLQ are extreme to say the least.
I work near GLQ, but if I get the train I arrive at GLC. If it was taking me 20 minutes to get from West Street to GLQ every day, I'd be making serious complaints.
I've been watching the Crossrail situation for a while, and personally I don't see the benefits.
Yes, it completes the Scottish rail 'jigsaw'. But what good is a jigsaw if nobody wants to play with it?
Do we have commitment for services from Ayrshire to Perth for example? Doubtful.
Most transport systems are based on a hub and spoke system; which don't necessarily assume that all spokes are interconnected.
Why not build some sort of underground travelator link between GLC and GLQ? The stations are geographically too close to justify such a roundabout new route.
TMC's timings to get from GLC to GLQ are extreme to say the least.
I work near GLQ, but if I get the train I arrive at GLC. If it was taking me 20 minutes to get from West Street to GLQ every day, I'd be making serious complaints.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 9:19am Thu 17 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Steve L[/bold] wrote:
I've been watching the Crossrail situation for a while, and personally I don't see the benefits. Yes, it completes the Scottish rail 'jigsaw'. But what good is a jigsaw if nobody wants to play with it? Do we have commitment for services from Ayrshire to Perth for example? Doubtful. Most transport systems are based on a hub and spoke system; which don't necessarily assume that all spokes are interconnected. Why not build some sort of underground travelator link between GLC and GLQ? The stations are geographically too close to justify such a roundabout new route. TMC's timings to get from GLC to GLQ are extreme to say the least. I work near GLQ, but if I get the train I arrive at GLC. If it was taking me 20 minutes to get from West Street to GLQ every day, I'd be making serious complaints.[/quote] [quote]I reckon it takes about 5 minutes to get into Central after the signals have allowed you to do so (If there are no points failure), once your off the train and through the barrier check and out onto Gordon St that's another 5 minutes, then you have a walk from there to Queen St (provided you know where you are going) so that's another 5-10 minutes depending on how well you know the area.
All in all a 15-20 minute kafuffle from West St to Queen St
[bold]I reckon Crossrail can do it in under half the time[/bold][/quote]
[bold]Steve L[/bold] wrote:
[quote]If it was taking me 20 minutes to get from West Street to GLQ every day, I'd be making serious complaints.[/quote]
Can you read the text properly instead of mincing my words.
Many thanks
Steve L wrote:
I've been watching the Crossrail situation for a while, and personally I don't see the benefits. Yes, it completes the Scottish rail 'jigsaw'. But what good is a jigsaw if nobody wants to play with it? Do we have commitment for services from Ayrshire to Perth for example? Doubtful. Most transport systems are based on a hub and spoke system; which don't necessarily assume that all spokes are interconnected. Why not build some sort of underground travelator link between GLC and GLQ? The stations are geographically too close to justify such a roundabout new route. TMC's timings to get from GLC to GLQ are extreme to say the least. I work near GLQ, but if I get the train I arrive at GLC. If it was taking me 20 minutes to get from West Street to GLQ every day, I'd be making serious complaints.
I reckon it takes about 5 minutes to get into Central after the signals have allowed you to do so (If there are no points failure), once your off the train and through the barrier check and out onto Gordon St that's another 5 minutes, then you have a walk from there to Queen St (provided you know where you are going) so that's another 5-10 minutes depending on how well you know the area.
All in all a 15-20 minute kafuffle from West St to Queen St
I reckon Crossrail can do it in under half the time
Steve L wrote:
If it was taking me 20 minutes to get from West Street to GLQ every day, I'd be making serious complaints.
Can you read the text properly instead of mincing my words.
Many thanks
Posted by: Steve L, Cambuslang on 9:57am Thu 17 Apr 08
[quote]Can you read the text properly instead of mincing my words.[/quote]
Are you unable to read yourself? You said the current situation makes it "a 15-20 minute kafuffle from West St to Queen St".
I disagreed, and said that if it were talking me 20 minutes to make this distance each day, I'd be complaining.
How is this: a) not reading the text properly, or b) mincing your words?
Crossrail may indeed cut this process down to 10 mins; but my point is that it doesn't take 20 mins at the moment, so why bother with the expense in Crossrail for negligable time saving?
And all of this on the premise that services will be provided in such a fashion.
Can you read the text properly instead of mincing my words.
Are you unable to read yourself? You said the current situation makes it "a 15-20 minute kafuffle from West St to Queen St".
I disagreed, and said that if it were talking me 20 minutes to make this distance each day, I'd be complaining.
How is this: a) not reading the text properly, or b) mincing your words?
Crossrail may indeed cut this process down to 10 mins; but my point is that it doesn't take 20 mins at the moment, so why bother with the expense in Crossrail for negligable time saving?
And all of this on the premise that services will be provided in such a fashion.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 10:55am Thu 17 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Steve L[/bold] wrote:
[quote]Can you read the text properly instead of mincing my words.[/quote] Are you unable to read yourself? You said the current situation makes it "a 15-20 minute kafuffle from West St to Queen St". I disagreed, and said that if it were talking me 20 minutes to make this distance each day, I'd be complaining. How is this: a) not reading the text properly, or b) mincing your words? Crossrail may indeed cut this process down to 10 mins; but my point is that it doesn't take 20 mins at the moment, so why bother with the expense in Crossrail for negligable time saving? And all of this on the premise that services will be provided in such a fashion.[/quote] It can take as much as 20 minutes Steve - besides I'd rather look at the bigger picture, this will create and open up travel opportunities for the whole of Scotland, not just the working commuter who'd rather walk, and anyway, what about interchange times? That would increase the 20 minute thing I'm going on about!
If you are stuck in traffic on the Central bridge (which I have experienced myself personally, it can take 20 minutes it has happened)
Steve L wrote:
Can you read the text properly instead of mincing my words.
Are you unable to read yourself? You said the current situation makes it "a 15-20 minute kafuffle from West St to Queen St". I disagreed, and said that if it were talking me 20 minutes to make this distance each day, I'd be complaining. How is this: a) not reading the text properly, or b) mincing your words? Crossrail may indeed cut this process down to 10 mins; but my point is that it doesn't take 20 mins at the moment, so why bother with the expense in Crossrail for negligable time saving? And all of this on the premise that services will be provided in such a fashion.
It can take as much as 20 minutes Steve - besides I'd rather look at the bigger picture, this will create and open up travel opportunities for the whole of Scotland, not just the working commuter who'd rather walk, and anyway, what about interchange times? That would increase the 20 minute thing I'm going on about!
If you are stuck in traffic on the Central bridge (which I have experienced myself personally, it can take 20 minutes it has happened)
Posted by: Steve L, Cambuslang on 10:29pm Thu 17 Apr 08
I don't disagree with you, it could indeed open up travel OPPORTUNITIES. My point, however, is that I can't see many of these opportunities being profitable from the outset.
The only advantage I can derive from Crossrail, is that it may negate the need to travel from Central to Queen St or vice versa. I can't see an influx of East Kilbride to Dundee trains for example.
Maybe I'll be proven wrong; maybe they have grand ideas for this project which are yet to be detailed.
However, like the 'Subway' extension, I feel this is another pie-eyed idea, which doesn't take into account real life; and only serves as a political means for campaign.
Both of these projects could work well, if the people involved actually consulted with the public at large. But, that won't happen to any great degree. And these projects, if followed through to completion, will become white elephants in varying degrees.
I don't disagree with you, it could indeed open up travel OPPORTUNITIES. My point, however, is that I can't see many of these opportunities being profitable from the outset.
The only advantage I can derive from Crossrail, is that it may negate the need to travel from Central to Queen St or vice versa. I can't see an influx of East Kilbride to Dundee trains for example.
Maybe I'll be proven wrong; maybe they have grand ideas for this project which are yet to be detailed.
However, like the 'Subway' extension, I feel this is another pie-eyed idea, which doesn't take into account real life; and only serves as a political means for campaign.
Both of these projects could work well, if the people involved actually consulted with the public at large. But, that won't happen to any great degree. And these projects, if followed through to completion, will become white elephants in varying degrees.
Comment | Read Comments (29)
