But I am still confused. If Chunnel trains call in at Kings Cross-St Pancras, and can then go on to Manchester, then why have two London termini??
Silver - you need to take another look at the plans. The current idea is that any trains linking between HS1 and HS2 would not call at either Euston
or St Pancras - and there lies the problem!
We already have a TGV terminus at KC-SP, so why build another at Euston?
Beautiful though it is, because it only has 6 platforms. The newly developed Euston will have at least 10 for HS2. If they need an average window of 30 mins to be cleaned and turned round + a buffer to absorb delays, 10 platforms would serve 20 trains per hour. Current proposals are for around 14tph after phase 2, 18 max line capacity, although I understand it could go as high as 30. So Euston has the right number of platforms, they are just facing the wrong way to link into possible future airport expansion (imho).
One presumes that all the UK trains will be of the Chunnel loading gauge dimensions, to allow easy operability through to Europe.
I'm afraid they won't:
1) Special adaptations need to be done to fit through the tunnel,
afaik, largely due to fire regs - so standard TGVs wouldn't work either, the 3 Capitals variants are ok.
2) Initially, a lot of services will be operated by hybrid trains, which are backwards compatible with the existing lines - 8 cars long (11 max), no tilting, so they are actually slower than the Pendolini on classic tracks. I could go on here, but this really belongs on the hs2 thread.......
I presume, therefore, that the government will announce the Silver-Boris go-ahead shortly.
Firstly, they couldn't just do that. There has to be some form of consultation, and this may well be challenged, as if it is one sided - ie Boris Island yes or no, it is not letting other options be examined.
Look at a good year to hold and process the consultation, starting from March.
Whilst I think the government are serious about Boris Island, I just don't see how it would actually work in reality. Just because LHR has a noise problem doesn't mean you can just move the airport east, and all goes quiet. There are serious environmental concerns with the site, and these were all brought up in the 2003 White Paper.
And as for the economics, which usually win through - there may or may not be investors, but they can only get an ROI if the airlines want to move there. Otherwise there will be another monumental battle getting LHR to close. We know where BA stand, we know there is no low cost interest, so who wants in on BI?
Euston is an absolute pain in the a*se, as it is not on the circle line and nigh on impossible to get to.
Oh please! When was the last time you were actually in central London? Euston effectively has 3 tube lines underneath, and 3 more a very short walk away - C/M/H&C at Euston Square. The new station will link directly to these lines, if you care to to take the time to review the plans before commenting on them.
There is a bus station right infront of the concourse, and a Boris Bike stand on either side. As it happens, most of the time I go to London, I finish up around Covent Garden, from where I can walk to Euston in around 30 mins.
The problem with what they are proposing is not that Euston isn't central, which it clearly is. The problem is that they are not providing the very through links which make high speed rail so advantageous in the first place - whether to airports or anywhere else people want to go.