bigherb Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Of course that could still retain it as an airfield for small private planes if it was desired but you need to be realistic about the world we live in. Runways are not everything when it comes to airports. Not really ideal for that either the runway is at the wrong orientation for the prevailing winds for light aircraft. There is not a great deal left of the military airfield anyway and what is could easily be left, the main military parts are in the fire training area not easily accessible to joe public. Most of the old camp is under the fire training area. And I have just told my ###### cat he's not having his favourite food from Lidl anymore because they opened a store on Hawkinge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapford34102 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Firstly apologies, from me at least, to Graham for hijacking this thread. Mike, not sure I was scaremongering but simply highlighting a possible side effect. The technical doc for the Parkway is here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-31351650and the section on Timetable Implications caught my eye. Attempts to close Dumpton Park have already been made. PM me if you like. Stu Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJS1977 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 The ideal place for a big international airport is actually to the NW of London somewhere along the Oxford - Northampton axis. Easy to reach by road thanks to the A43 (which links to the A14, M1, M40 A34, etc) Slap bang on the alignment of HS2, Could be served by a branch from the Oxford - Bletchley line for local rail traffic, AVOIDS traffic having to go round London on the congested M25 to get to it, Within relatively easy reach of Bristol &Birmingham etc. There must be some former RAF aerodrome in the Northampton area they could use... provided no flights will be taking off or landing on one weekend in July.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Storey Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 Firstly apologies, from me at least, to Graham for hijacking this thread. Mike, not sure I was scaremongering but simply highlighting a possible side effect. The technical doc for the Parkway is here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-31351650and the section on Timetable Implications caught my eye. Attempts to close Dumpton Park have already been made. PM me if you like. Stu Hi Stu I think that's the link already posted, from the BBC about Roger Gale's moans. Is there another one, more about the Parkway proposals? I have seen nothing yet indicating likely service patterns (I never saw the original submission), so would be very interested. thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 There must be some former RAF aerodrome in the Northampton area they could use... provided no flights will be taking off or landing on one weekend in July.... I would have thought that Upper Heyford would very nearly fit the requirements. Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Andy W Posted February 12, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 12, 2015 Taking the cargo load of Heathrow, shorthaul options (e.g. KLM - only quit because of closure), maintenance and servicing of commercial aircraft, scrap... why can Germany operate a successful international aviation maintenance facility at FRA; we don't have anything to compare with that and Manston would be ideal. You can’t fit a widebody into Lasham! OK 744s and 772s have got into Cambridge. Training of pilots on large aircraft in a fully equipped airport, again where? Prestwick, Cardiff... I notice from BASource that BA A380s are now doing circuits in South Africa, yet 18 months ago it was Manston. That is revenue that previously went to a British company to support local jobs (and national taxes) now going overseas. You can't land an A380 on a runway retained for small aircraft... (please don't associate these comments with any political leanings (red or blue boxes or any other colour)). 772s and 744s have rather more than "got into" Cambridge. BA routinely send them there if their heavy maintenance operation at Cardiff has more work than it can handle, there's work going on there on 787s at the moment. Frankfurt works because it does the heavy maintenance for the entire Lufthansa group as well as contract maintenance for other airlines. To produce the equivalent at Manston you'd need to force BA to move its heavy maintenance for the large aircraft from Cardiff. and for the short-haul fleet from Glasgow, not to mention Iberia's from Madrid in order to achieve the required scale. Why should all these skilled engineers be forced to move or lose their jobs? Would it put the future of Cardiff airport in jeopardy? Then there's the A380 training - using Manston was fine before the A380s entered service. Now that they are in use you need to find spare time between trips for training. It just so happens that the timetable leaves an A380 idle for about 12 hours in Johannesburg (because of the Heathrow overnight restrictions), so it can easily be used for a few hours training before it is needed for passenger service again. The gaps in the timetables at the UK end are used for routine maintenance and servicing, so there's no plane available to train pilots with. Marginally relevant to a Hornby discussion given that they do now include Airfix and Corgi model aircraft. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 Look like Hornby gets an Air fix! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJS1977 Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 There are some on here which remember blue & white and red & white striped boxes which emanated from Liverpool which in my humble opinion were a far better product in its day than the stuff from Margate. They may well have been better,but the quality came at a price. Tri-ang moved the hobby from one which was still in the realm of the relatively affluent to one which most families were able to afford - in much the same way as a Rolls Royce Silver Ghost was undoubtedly better quality than a Model T Ford, but without the latter car ownership would have remained an exclusive of the rich. Unfortunately I fear that the current emphasis on expensive "super detail" models is now moving the hobby in the opposite direction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lurker Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 I would have thought that Upper Heyford would very nearly fit the requirements. Bernard I was going to suggest Sywell. Although more seriously there are already international airports at Luton Birmingham East Midlands and Stansted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 12, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 12, 2015 They may well have been better,but the quality came at a price. Tri-ang moved the hobby from one which was still in the realm of the relatively affluent to one which most families were able to afford - in much the same way as a Rolls Royce Silver Ghost was undoubtedly better quality than a Model T Ford, but without the latter car ownership would have remained an exclusive of the rich. Unfortunately I fear that the current emphasis on expensive "super detail" models is now moving the hobby in the opposite direction. Why "fear"? There is obviously a healthy demand for highly detailed models with enough customers able and, more important, WILLING to pay for them, otherwise they wouldn't get made in the first place. All hobbies cost money but there is still plenty of scope for enjoying ours on relatively less of it, that's why Hornby make the Railroad range and there are plenty of 'as new' bargains out there for those who are still satisfied with 20th century levels of detail. Rolls Royce didn't stop making high quality, expensive cars because Ford started introduced cheaper ones but Ford, along with most other car makers, now offer products at a number of price levels; just like Hornby. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PhilJ W Posted February 12, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 12, 2015 What about Liverpool? Handy for John Lennon International? Hat and coat on and gone........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapford34102 Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 hi, Mike, apologies, pasted wrong link. Try http://www.kent.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/16622/Thanet-Parkway-Station-Technical-Note.pdf There's also this http://www.kent.gov.uk/roads-and-travel/travelling-around-kent/thanet-parkway-railway-station Stu Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJS1977 Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 Why "fear"? There is obviously healthy demand for highly detailed models with enough customers able and, more important, willing to pay for them, otherwise they wouldn't get made. All hobbies cost money but there is still plenty of scope for enjoying ours on relatively less of it, that's why Hornby make the Railroad range and there are plenty of 'as new' bargains out there for those who are still satisfied with 20th century levels of detail. Rolls Royce didn't stop making high quality, expensive cars because Ford started introduced cheaper ones but Ford, along with most other car makers, now offer products at a number of price levels; just like Hornby. John Unfortunately, Hornby's Railroad range is little more than lip-service, for anyone modelling anything other than BR Eastern Region transition period, it is virtually impossible to build a representative sample of trains from any given era or region! In particular,apart from Tornado and the NR Class 37, there are no contemporary models in the range - there should at least be an HST, a 66 and some sort of multiple unit available to give youngsters and those on limited budgets the possibility of being able to model what they see every day. Also, the steam era range is heavily skewed towards big express locos (Scotsman, A4, Tornado, DoG) with little in the way of tank engines (other than the Pug and 101, both of which are limited in their sphere of operation) - yes, there's a Jinty but as it's in S&D blue, its sphere and period of operation is also limited - I don't think there's anything else in the range it could legitimately run alongside. At the very least, it ought to be possible to purchase a representative selection of locos from each of the Big Four - say a tank engine or two, an 0-6-0 goods loco (Dean Goods, 4F etc) and an express loco, plus appropriate rolling stock, without breaking the bank, same for other periods. As it is, it is very difficult for someone starting out in the hobby to create a reasonable collection of locos/stock that would have been seen together for a reasonable price other than by resorting to the second hand market. Nothing against the super-detailed models in principle (though who really needs posable cab/smokebox doors or vents?), but I believe the hobby should be accessible to as many people as possible irrespective of budget, and compared with what was available at a reasonable price when I started out in the hobby the range now is very limited. VW didn't stop building Polos when they bought out Bentley! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted February 12, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 12, 2015 I would have thought that Upper Heyford would very nearly fit the requirements. Bernard I'm not sure what has happened to the runway there but various bits of the base are in all sorts of uses. There are also nice big runways at Brize Norton (the RAF might like a bit of extra income?) and Fairford (for most of the year) although road access to the latter is restricted and then of course there's a lovely big runway with plenty of aircraft associated infrastructure at Filton which sits under a rather less busier sky than the south east corner of England. However none of these are really suited as a new location for Hornby Group HQ (apart from the Airfix/Corgi link) so perhaps we'd better get away from aeroplanes and if not talking about the office block at least talk about local infrastructure which - let's face - needs only be suited to housing the folk who will work in those offices and enabling them to get to & from work plus the occasional business trip elsewhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted February 12, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 12, 2015 hi, Mike, apologies, pasted wrong link. Try http://www.kent.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/16622/Thanet-Parkway-Station-Technical-Note.pdf Stu Thanks for that Stu. Having worked (in a consultancy role) on similar things in the past I couldn't restrain myself from bursting out laughing at some points in that document, especially the bit about gradients and some of the comments about the signalling and about level crossing modernisation. In railway terms it strikes me as a very poor site indeed with heavy gradients and the level crossing - and although the latter could be modernised the gradients are immovable and just because the bit of paper that said don't build on heavy gradients no longer exists it was supposed to have been superseded by folk having the commonsense to do what used to be written down (for example continuous brakes are no longer legally required by British legislation - but commonsense suggests they have an important part to play). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenman Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 I expected the mockery that seems par for the course on this forum. However, Stationmaster, would you care to point out where I wrote that Hornby were destroying Manston Airport? I seem to have missed it. The issue is with the manner in which Gloag acquired this British asset (for £1), making certain promises for its future, and then closed it. Oh dear, but don't worry - mirabile deus! - up pops a massive 'regeneration' scheme for housing and all the usual suspects, with plenty of positive propaganda attached, to make good use of the 'derelict' site. This was BEFORE the council had made any decision with regard to compulsory purchase. Next we hear that the Discovery Park entrepreneurs have taken on the scheme, cue more positive propaganda. However, under examination, all parties involved seem curiously reticent about who actually owns what and where the money is coming from. We are told that Britain needs more airport capacity, but if this scheme proceeds one of the largest runways in the country will be lost to fill the pockets of some already very rich people. Those of you who are laughing at me for having principles, please don't come whining if an airport near you is expanded. My issue with Hornby is that the company doesn't need to move to Discovery Park. By doing so, the company appears to have no problem with the actions of the Discovery Park entrepreneurs. If Stationmaster and all those who like what he wrote couldn't care less about British infrastructure, or think that the greed of the few outweighs the needs of the nation, then fine. However, I base my choice on my own morals and ethics. No-one else has a say in that. I choose not to support a company that apparently cares so little about the type of people with whom it deals. That doesn't prevent any of you out there from buying as much Hornby product as you wish. In the past I would just have clicked "Disagree" and moved on, but now I have to write something to express myself. Apologies to everyone for the resulting tedium. Firstly, Stagecoach (much praised by many as a TOC) has a long history of doing exactly this with public assets: one of their first actions on buying a formerly nationalised coach operator several decades ago was to sell off Southampton coach station as a redevelopment opportunity. Their coaches then stopped in the road, by the pavement, causing large-scale congestion and reducing public safety. The Council eventually had to spend more public money on building a whole new coach station for Stagecoach to use, while Stagecoach's owners frolicked in bathtubs filled with money (or something - I may have imagined the last bit). Your outrage at Hornby strikes me as misplaced: a bit like blaming the theatre that sold a ticket to the assassin John Wilkes Booth, thus enabling him to get access to President Lincoln. Let's not slag off the man himself, or even the gun or bullet manufacturers, or perhaps even the bus company that gave Wilkes Booth a ride to the theatre; no, let's just focus on the theatre. Those evil bast*rds. We'll never watch another musical there again. Hah! That will teach them! You wrote, quite clearly, "the issue is with the manner in which Gloag acquired this ... asset". Well, that may be so. In which case, why are you attacking poor bloody Hornby? Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted February 12, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 12, 2015 I would never have believed that a simple office move could generate so much discussion! Who was it that owned Manston and sold it for £1? Was there a clause in the deal which gave them a share of the takings if Ms Gloag sold it on? Why didn't the local authority (or anyone else) want it for £1. Realistically, difficult to see how the economics of running such an airport would work. High maintenance costs relative to the traffic on offer. Seems like a good place for a business park if you are a firm that does a lot of business with the European mainland (like Hornby). Looks like a very sound business decision on their part and whether or not they occupy makes not a jot of difference to the future of the airport. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jol Wilkinson Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 Also, the steam era range is heavily skewed towards big express locos (Scotsman, A4, Tornado, DoG) with little in the way of tank engines (other than the Pug and 101, both of which are limited in their sphere of operation) - yes, there's a Jinty but as it's in S&D blue, its sphere and period of operation is also limited - I don't think there's anything else in the range it could legitimately run alongside. Nothing against the super-detailed models in principle (though who really needs posable cab/smokebox doors or vents?), but I believe the hobby should be accessible to as many people as possible irrespective of budget, and compared with what was available at a reasonable price when I started out in the hobby the range now is very limited. VW didn't stop building Polos when they bought out Bentley! The manufacture and sales of large express locos has probably more to do with the modeller/collector's preoccupation with them than "ordinary" engines. It is not uncommon to find topics such as "How many Hornby A4's have you got?" or engine shed threads with a myriad of pictures of A1s,A3, etc. When did you last see "My collection of small tank engines"?. Your VW analogy is interesting. Working in the motor industry I learned that it doesn't cost twice as much to build a car that retailed for £20K as it does to build one that sells for £10K. However, lower sales volumes of the £20K car needs to be offset by higher unit profit. Does that apply to RTR models? Would you buy two small tank locos or one large express loco at the same total price? If you have limited production capacity available, would you build one thousand £150 locos or one thousand £75 locos? As for looking after the budget restrained modeller, it does seem that if you make them, people will buy them, irrespective of what it is. The NRM have shown that to be the case with GNR Atlantics at £179 and I expect they will all get sold. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 I would never have believed that a simple office move could generate so much discussion! Who was it that owned Manston and sold it for £1? Was there a clause in the deal which gave them a share of the takings if Ms Gloag sold it on? Why didn't the local authority (or anyone else) want it for £1. Realistically, difficult to see how the economics of running such an airport would work. High maintenance costs relative to the traffic on offer. Seems like a good place for a business park if you are a firm that does a lot of business with the European mainland (like Hornby). Looks like a very sound business decision on their part and whether or not they occupy makes not a jot of difference to the future of the airport. I believe Manston had passed through a number of hands over the last few years; though some of the owners had seemed to be interested only in the development potential, there had been attempts to run year-round scheduled flights, but all came to nought. I passed the site on Tuesday, and noticed that even the 'aircraft re-cycling facility' (a piece of concrete apron next to the museum) had given up the ghost. Having heard previous stories of the demise of the Hoverport and the decline of Ramsgate harbour, I was disappointed that the 'Arab sheiks' didn't make an appearance. These were a group of local 'dignitaries' who, in an attempt to draw attention to the decline of these facilities, made themselves up, donned Bedouin costume, and stood in front of TV and press to give the impression that there was an international interest in keeping them going. It didn't work... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hroth Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 What about Liverpool? Handy for John Lennon International? Hat and coat on and gone........ Well, around 2004 the Binns Road site in Liverpool was a "Fitness Centre". But according to Google Earth (2014), even that appears to have gone now, in fact the area is a mixture of small industrial units and wasteland, so if you're wanting some training in quick getaways, then even thats out! As for Speke Airport, its good for holiday destinations in Europe and links to Ireland. Until HS2 gets to Liverpool, they'd be (sadly) better off in Manchester..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 12, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 12, 2015 Unfortunately, Hornby's Railroad range is little more than lip-service, for anyone modelling anything other than BR Eastern Region transition period, it is virtually impossible to build a representative sample of trains from any given era or region! In particular,apart from Tornado and the NR Class 37, there are no contemporary models in the range - there should at least be an HST, a 66 and some sort of multiple unit available to give youngsters and those on limited budgets the possibility of being able to model what they see every day. Also, the steam era range is heavily skewed towards big express locos (Scotsman, A4, Tornado, DoG) with little in the way of tank engines (other than the Pug and 101, both of which are limited in their sphere of operation) - yes, there's a Jinty but as it's in S&D blue, its sphere and period of operation is also limited - I don't think there's anything else in the range it could legitimately run alongside. At the very least, it ought to be possible to purchase a representative selection of locos from each of the Big Four - say a tank engine or two, an 0-6-0 goods loco (Dean Goods, 4F etc) and an express loco, plus appropriate rolling stock, without breaking the bank, same for other periods. As it is, it is very difficult for someone starting out in the hobby to create a reasonable collection of locos/stock that would have been seen together for a reasonable price other than by resorting to the second hand market. Nothing against the super-detailed models in principle (though who really needs posable cab/smokebox doors or vents?), but I believe the hobby should be accessible to as many people as possible irrespective of budget, and compared with what was available at a reasonable price when I started out in the hobby the range now is very limited. VW didn't stop building Polos when they bought out Bentley! Railroad models are aimed at train-setters; modellers only buy them if they want to carve them about. If you are interested in what you can see every day, it's surely more fun to go and look at it, why model it? I think you are looking back through rose-tinted specs because, with or without Railroad, until super-detail came along, Hornby's coverage of locos with fewer than ten wheels was never better than patchy; big, green and named has always been their real passion. Whilst not all are in the current catalogue, the Railroad range has not lacked 0-6-0Ts, Jinty, Pannier, J52, J83 and might have an E2 had the moulds not been destroyed to produce Thomas. The question is, would overall sales increase if a range of 4 basic tank locos were available continuously as against a rotation of one or two at a time? Hornby don't appear to think so. Most "modellers" locos, until quite recently, came in blue boxes and Hornby were relatively slow to catch up. I had a train set as a kid and started "modelling" a bit in my early teens. I then discovered girls and motorbikes and, like many others, ceased to have much involvement in model railways for the next 20-odd years. What drew me back to the hobby was improved authenticity - on offer from Airfix and Mainline c1979, not whether Hornby did or did not produce a Jinty equivalent for each region. When I did start modelling "properly" most of my locos were S/H Triang-Hornby , not just because it was cheaper - I was inhibited by the idea of taking a razor saw to a brand new one! I am all for the hobby being accessible for newcomers but, as soon as one starts to get involved more seriously, costs escalate likewise. That has always been so and the advent of super detailed r-t-r hasn't really changed it. The difference is now that, instead of buying a basic loco and a load of extra bits (or a Crownline detailing kit), one now spends an equivalent sum and someone else does the modelling! I make no judgement as to whether that's better or worse, it's just the way things have developed. A desire by companies to move upmarket in pursuit of enhanced image and profits is almost universal nowadays - the current VW Polo is at least as big as the original Golf. What youngsters spend on keeping up with the latest tech items when their old ones offer more features than they ever use makes the price of model locos look like chickenfeed and I doubt making more cheap ones would change that. We need to face the fact that our hobby is mainly populated by the middle-aged and elderly, many of them on final salary pensions, and the manufacturers are catering for that market. As the youngsters get older, they are not going to be so fortunate but, in any case, railways play a very minor role (if any) in most people's lives nowadays so fewer of them will be inspired to model in the first place. Our hobby is, realistically, never going to grow much bigger than it is today; I intend to enjoy that while it lasts and not worry about what might happen when I'm gone. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted February 12, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 12, 2015 I think the old assumptions about Railroad being for train setters have became very blurred. The Crosti 9F is almost certainly going to be primarily bought by modellers and the newly tooled steamers (A1, P2, Hall) and the Mk.1 coaches are good enough for modellers in their pared down Railroad form albeit those willing to accept a pared down level of detail and finish. The Railroad TTS diesels seem to be going down extremely well across the board. One of the issues with Railroad in recent times has been that it has started to sit uncomfortably between two worlds, with it becoming blurred where Railroad stops and main range begins. I think the new Railroad tooling fills a valuable spot for those on a budget. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted February 12, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 12, 2015 was driving at I think the old assumptions about Railroad being for train setters have became very blurred. The Crosti 9F is almost certainly going to be primarily bought by modellers and the newly tooled steamers (A1, P2, Hall) and the Mk.1 coaches are good enough for modellers in their pared down Railroad form albeit those willing to accept a pared down level of detail and finish. The Railroad TTS diesels seem to be going down extremely well across the board. One of the issues with Railroad in recent times has been that it has started to sit uncomfortably between two worlds, with it becoming blurred where Railroad stops and main range begins. I think the new Railroad tooling fills a valuable spot for those on a budget. Not a tank engine or small goods loco amongst them, though, which is what RJS1977 was driving at, and nothing (apart from the coaches) with fewer than 10 wheels, which tallies with Hornby's historic prejudices. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyman7 Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 I'm not entirely sure why we tend to look on a company's use of a longstanding site as being critical to its future? True the names 'Hornby' (nee Triang) and Margate might, in some respects, be synonymous - but the reality for many of us of a certain age is that the name Hornby is far more synonymous with Liverpool than a faded seaside town in the bottom right hand corner of the country. And as anyone who has tried to put modern IT into old buildings will know there is an awful lot to be said for getting out of them and going somewhere which is better suited to the needs of present day business management and equipment. Let's look on the bright side - at least they're not shifting everything out of the country, and in modern commuting terms we are only looking at a fairly short distance between the old out of town site and the new out of town site. Well indeed. If it matters that much we should be insisting that they move back to Petersham Road, Richmond (the Rovex/Triang Railways factory until 1954)!. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapford34102 Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 Hi, Mike thanks for your comments. I had wondered about the safety case in respect of the level crossings but didn't ponder to much on gradient issue. As regards the timetable a train stopping at the parkway station will mean arriving in Ramsgate and subsequent stations 4mins later. This will have an effect on other services, platforms, pathways etc. One possible solution is to retime other services to leave later. But to avoid knock on effects further along the network it is suggested trains miss out current stops so they so they end up being at the right place right time. I.E. keep the current timetable but take out a stop or two. It's only one of three possible options but it's the one that would have an effect on travellers, me included. Talk on a taking 1 hour to get to St Pancras is interesting but I would assume to achieve that they would need to sort out the restriction at Grove ferry and raise speeds on the Ramsgate-Canterbury-Ashford line to something above its present Edwardian levels. Stu Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.