EDINBURGH
I just hope your not an accountant or in the "city". 9 Billion will not be covered by lottery money by a long shot and i should think all of the UK tax payers will have to pay - not just Londoner's!!
The cost of Edinburgh links etc will no doubt all come out soon enough although I am sure that PFI and PPP will be heavily involved.
The cost of Edinburgh links etc will no doubt all come out soon enough although I am sure that PFI and PPP will be heavily involved.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nivsy,
Neither. I'm not going to defend the Olympics, as I said, I didn't ask for them. Any chance of getting back to the issue?
According to:
http://www.earlproject.com/qanda.php#04
"How Much Will It Cost?
Now that the public consultation, technical development and environmental consultation stages are complete, tie is developing the project’s business case and finalising the overall cost assessment of the project. Initial studies suggested that the construction of the scheme would cost close to £500m. The indications of the ongoing work on the business case suggest that the final cost will be within this budget. The total project cost is now being refined as further technical assessments are completed."
Already £610m and counting!
"Who Will Pay?
EARL is a national project and it is anticipated that the Scottish Executive will be the principal funder"
And who funds the Scottish Executive? I understand that the Scottish Parliament has tax raising powers, but has it used them? Ditto, with route development funds - I'm not aware of any extra taxation scheme which pays for these, but I would be happy to stand corrected.
Neither. I'm not going to defend the Olympics, as I said, I didn't ask for them. Any chance of getting back to the issue?
According to:
http://www.earlproject.com/qanda.php#04
"How Much Will It Cost?
Now that the public consultation, technical development and environmental consultation stages are complete, tie is developing the project’s business case and finalising the overall cost assessment of the project. Initial studies suggested that the construction of the scheme would cost close to £500m. The indications of the ongoing work on the business case suggest that the final cost will be within this budget. The total project cost is now being refined as further technical assessments are completed."
Already £610m and counting!
"Who Will Pay?
EARL is a national project and it is anticipated that the Scottish Executive will be the principal funder"
And who funds the Scottish Executive? I understand that the Scottish Parliament has tax raising powers, but has it used them? Ditto, with route development funds - I'm not aware of any extra taxation scheme which pays for these, but I would be happy to stand corrected.
Last edited by jabird; 15th Mar 2007 at 18:58.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Livingston and Edinburgh
Age: 86
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EARL will serve Scotland not just Edinburgh Airport.
One must remember that the Newbridge viaduct and a dodgy tunnel near Winchburgh will not last forever, hence the reason for diverting the Glasgow line through EDI.
I'm amazed that this project has attracted such attention.
Recommended reading ..http://www.earlproject.com
One must remember that the Newbridge viaduct and a dodgy tunnel near Winchburgh will not last forever, hence the reason for diverting the Glasgow line through EDI.
I'm amazed that this project has attracted such attention.
Recommended reading ..http://www.earlproject.com
The feasability study on the same web site that you mention (Chapter 7 - financial costs) is interesting reading with many potential partners being involved - altho' ofcourse it can be argued that they will need to recoup investment of costs for such a project. European Money also seem poss
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"There can't be many public capital engineering
projects in that league?"
I can think of one down in Holyrood which was almost as expensive, and a lot less useful.
I accept the whole of Scotland argument, joining the lines seems like a good idea. But the majority of pax flying to/from EDI must still want to get to the centre or the outskirts of Edinburgh. The airport express and local buses provide this option. Last time I flew to EDI, I took the bus which goes down CERT (#22?) to Leith. Think I was about the only person on it until it got to Edinburgh Park.
How many does that leave who will benefit, including those non-air pax who can transfer there - but presumably at a hefty premium?
I think it is a great project, but I just can't see it justifying such a hefty price tag - we are just talking about a station here, not a whole airport after all!
projects in that league?"
I can think of one down in Holyrood which was almost as expensive, and a lot less useful.
I accept the whole of Scotland argument, joining the lines seems like a good idea. But the majority of pax flying to/from EDI must still want to get to the centre or the outskirts of Edinburgh. The airport express and local buses provide this option. Last time I flew to EDI, I took the bus which goes down CERT (#22?) to Leith. Think I was about the only person on it until it got to Edinburgh Park.
How many does that leave who will benefit, including those non-air pax who can transfer there - but presumably at a hefty premium?
I think it is a great project, but I just can't see it justifying such a hefty price tag - we are just talking about a station here, not a whole airport after all!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Joe, I did a "Google" on your name and I apologise if it isn't you, but a "Joe Curry" came up with this apparently -
"Why don't I fly AA from GLA? Because of the reasons you have listed
above... And because I want to support the local economy and jobs.
Using an airport gives airlines the impression you like it...that's why
I fly exclusively from EDI..."
I'm sure it's not you, but the comment is interesting I'm sure you'll agree, this guy whoever he is just doesn't want to use Glasgow Abbotsinch at any cost. Imagine we all thought like him?
SF
"Why don't I fly AA from GLA? Because of the reasons you have listed
above... And because I want to support the local economy and jobs.
Using an airport gives airlines the impression you like it...that's why
I fly exclusively from EDI..."
I'm sure it's not you, but the comment is interesting I'm sure you'll agree, this guy whoever he is just doesn't want to use Glasgow Abbotsinch at any cost. Imagine we all thought like him?
SF
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: scotland
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im really struggling to understand the logic in bulding an underground station and tunnels under the runway. To me the most logical thing to do is build a station on the main Edinburgh - Aberdeen mainline, at the East End of the runway (cargo end) and build a monorail to connect to the terminal like Gatwick or Birmingham.
But then again who am i to say anything im just a humble British Taxpayer with no rights.
But then again who am i to say anything im just a humble British Taxpayer with no rights.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Coventry
Age: 48
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Goldeneye,
Fair point, but LGW South Terminal is at least connected directly to the station.
What we have at BHX is a bit of a sham, because the people mover (sorry, downgraded Maglev) only provides a link between the station and Terminal 1. Pax have to trundle through T1 to get to T2.
There was some comment in the article about not wanting to build a guided busway and the rail link. I'm sure that a variation of Goldeneye's suggestion AND the busway could have been built. I think DUS might be a good example of the kind of scheme I think you are talking about? ICE station at the eastern end of the runways + S-bahn station under the terminal complex.
There would then have been plenty of change from £600m left over to upgrade walking and cycling facilities across all of Scotland - and the rest of the UK for that matter, and provide a few more bus subsidies, and re-open a couple of branch lines..............
Fair point, but LGW South Terminal is at least connected directly to the station.
What we have at BHX is a bit of a sham, because the people mover (sorry, downgraded Maglev) only provides a link between the station and Terminal 1. Pax have to trundle through T1 to get to T2.
There was some comment in the article about not wanting to build a guided busway and the rail link. I'm sure that a variation of Goldeneye's suggestion AND the busway could have been built. I think DUS might be a good example of the kind of scheme I think you are talking about? ICE station at the eastern end of the runways + S-bahn station under the terminal complex.
There would then have been plenty of change from £600m left over to upgrade walking and cycling facilities across all of Scotland - and the rest of the UK for that matter, and provide a few more bus subsidies, and re-open a couple of branch lines..............
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Livingston and Edinburgh
Age: 86
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet2 have plans for a weekly flight to Florence
Source: http://thescotsman.scotsman.com
Budget airline creates new link
THE first direct flights between Scotland and Provence have been announced by Jet2.com, with a Saturday service between Edinburgh and Avignon from June to September. It will be Edinburgh's seventh French route, after Flybe's Saturday flights to Bergerac and Rennes begin in May.
Article..
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/edin...=456902007#new
Source: http://thescotsman.scotsman.com
Budget airline creates new link
THE first direct flights between Scotland and Provence have been announced by Jet2.com, with a Saturday service between Edinburgh and Avignon from June to September. It will be Edinburgh's seventh French route, after Flybe's Saturday flights to Bergerac and Rennes begin in May.
Article..
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/edin...=456902007#new
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 43
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet2 have plans for a weekly flight to Florence
should have read Provence of course. Florence being an old girl friend whose name still haunts me,Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: GB
Age: 69
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crossing The Undershoot?
Can someone explain why is it at EDI when you're cleared taxi to holding point D for departure, you're "Clear to cross the 12 undershoot"????
I thought that when you're clear to proceed to D you are clear through the whole route to D and anything that's in the way. Then you have to read this nonsense back as well!!
Remembering that landing or taking off involves passing through that same silly undershoot 20 feet further away (the runway), but you're not told "clear to land/take off 24 and to fly through the 12 undershoot".
Please someone explain
I thought that when you're clear to proceed to D you are clear through the whole route to D and anything that's in the way. Then you have to read this nonsense back as well!!
Remembering that landing or taking off involves passing through that same silly undershoot 20 feet further away (the runway), but you're not told "clear to land/take off 24 and to fly through the 12 undershoot".
Please someone explain
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After the recommendations following the Linate accident were published, it was decided to add the markings "Runway Ahead" on the Alpha taxiway at the point where it crossed the 12 undershoot. Where these markings exist, at ANY airfield, specific clearance is required to proceed beyond the holding point at that location. As you do not cross these markings when departing or landing then no such clearance is required. Any clearance to a location can have restrictions put on that clearance, at the time or subsequently. To take it to the extreme, just because you are cleared to London Heathrow does not mean that you can ignore the bovingdon hold.
That said controllers adapting to the new requirement are using different methods of presentation, either giving the taxi clearance and crossing clearance together ( a bit of a mouthful ), giving taxi clearance to the runway ahead marking then subsequently onward (two seperate transmissions and the chance of stopping ) or giving clearance all the way and crossing clearance as the aircraft approaches the marking ( two seperate transmissions and not fail-safe ).
It is a busy time of coordination for the controller as well as the pilot and the requirement and timing for this additional r/t is a discussion that is ongoing, as Wee Jock states, through the appropriate channels. There are many official forums available for any of your concerns to be heard and considered where as on here, well, for all you know I might be a sheet metal worker from Barnsley!
That said controllers adapting to the new requirement are using different methods of presentation, either giving the taxi clearance and crossing clearance together ( a bit of a mouthful ), giving taxi clearance to the runway ahead marking then subsequently onward (two seperate transmissions and the chance of stopping ) or giving clearance all the way and crossing clearance as the aircraft approaches the marking ( two seperate transmissions and not fail-safe ).
It is a busy time of coordination for the controller as well as the pilot and the requirement and timing for this additional r/t is a discussion that is ongoing, as Wee Jock states, through the appropriate channels. There are many official forums available for any of your concerns to be heard and considered where as on here, well, for all you know I might be a sheet metal worker from Barnsley!
Last edited by Bagheera; 2nd Apr 2007 at 12:19.