|
|
Post by gwiwer on Sept 18, 2023 19:01:59 GMT
Supplementary question.
As the Cargo Tunnel is airside (even if it is below ground and not particularly close to aircraft) were spark arrestors required for vehicles operating the 82 / 724? Beacons were not because they didn't use the apron area. Only some of the BTLs had those fitted for transfer work.
|
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Sept 18, 2023 20:47:53 GMT
Just wondering if anyone knows but when the Hatton Cross area had a slightly different road layout (where there was a road which went straight across towards Harlington Corner rather than going all the way round) did buses use the shorter route towards Harlington Corner or did they use the current route? These are the co-ordinates of the roundabout still in place. A road used to connect it to the next roundabout ahead in the North direction. This is the old road I am referring to. 51.47289033933617, -0.42719655757011277 Yes, the Eastern Perimiter Road used to take a more direct line rather than going round the back of the British Airways base as it does now. There used to be warning lights (the same kind you see at railway level crossings) which stopped traffic whenever an aircraft was being moved to or from the hangars. Clearly this posed a security risk and the road was diverted some years ago. At one time there was an even more direct road between Harlington Corner and Hatton Cross but this disappeared under the airport, as did the village of Heath Row - after which the airport was named. One of the best-known place names in the world is a tiny village that no longer exists. Is this the remains of that old road? 51.478535, -0.432178 |
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Sept 19, 2023 7:01:48 GMT
Yes, the Eastern Perimiter Road used to take a more direct line rather than going round the back of the British Airways base as it does now. There used to be warning lights (the same kind you see at railway level crossings) which stopped traffic whenever an aircraft was being moved to or from the hangars. Clearly this posed a security risk and the road was diverted some years ago. At one time there was an even more direct road between Harlington Corner and Hatton Cross but this disappeared under the airport, as did the village of Heath Row - after which the airport was named. One of the best-known place names in the world is a tiny village that no longer exists. Is this the remains of that old road? 51.478535, -0.432178 Yes. It was called Hatton Road, which explains why we now have a Hatton Road North and a Hatton Road South with a big gap in between. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Sept 20, 2023 15:27:04 GMT
The mentioning of the 533 reminded me of the original plan of having Hammersmith bridge strengthened.
You know TfL and Hammersmith council were planning to have Hammersmith Bridge strengthened to have DDs running on it hence why the 72 was retained with double decks and the 283 was originally planned to be temporarily terminated at Hammersmith. Even TfL are broke do you think that the original plan to have Hammersmith Bridge to be strengthened to have double deckers running on it is still cards or do you think that it has been scrapped since the bridge has been closed to traffic permanently?
If I remember correctly TfL and Hammersmith council were fighting over who would pay for who have the bridge strengthened. Are Hammersmith Council also broke?
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 20, 2023 16:13:22 GMT
The mentioning of the 533 reminded me of the original plan of having Hammersmith bridge strengthened. You know TfL and Hammersmith council were planning to have Hammersmith Bridge strengthened to have DDs running on it hence why the 72 was retained with double decks and the 283 was originally planned to be temporarily terminated at Hammersmith. Even TfL are broke do you think that the original plan to have Hammersmith Bridge to be strengthened to have double deckers running on it is still cards or do you think that it has been scrapped since the bridge has been closed to traffic permanently? If I remember correctly TfL and Hammersmith council were fighting over who would pay for who have the bridge strengthened. Are Hammersmith Council also broke? Knowing them and the mentality of this country, it wouldn't surprise me if the bridge won't see any motor traffic once re-opened. The bridge should of been demolished and rebuilt to it's listed standard so double deckers and other traffic can use it but that's too much ambition to ask for in the UK |
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Sept 21, 2023 10:18:30 GMT
The mentioning of the 533 reminded me of the original plan of having Hammersmith bridge strengthened. You know TfL and Hammersmith council were planning to have Hammersmith Bridge strengthened to have DDs running on it hence why the 72 was retained with double decks and the 283 was originally planned to be temporarily terminated at Hammersmith. Even TfL are broke do you think that the original plan to have Hammersmith Bridge to be strengthened to have double deckers running on it is still cards or do you think that it has been scrapped since the bridge has been closed to traffic permanently? If I remember correctly TfL and Hammersmith council were fighting over who would pay for who have the bridge strengthened. Are Hammersmith Council also broke? Knowing them and the mentality of this country, it wouldn't surprise me if the bridge won't see any motor traffic once re-opened. The bridge should of been demolished and rebuilt to it's listed standard so double deckers and other traffic can use it but that's too much ambition to ask for in the UK Easiest solution would be to leave the bridge alone and build a new one right next to it, but that would also never happen in this country. |
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Sept 21, 2023 10:45:02 GMT
Knowing them and the mentality of this country, it wouldn't surprise me if the bridge won't see any motor traffic once re-opened. The bridge should of been demolished and rebuilt to it's listed standard so double deckers and other traffic can use it but that's too much ambition to ask for in the UK Easiest solution would be to leave the bridge alone and build a new one right next to it, but that would also never happen in this country. For me the bridge should have been properly maintained in the first place so it never deteriorated into the current mess it is in. Then you would still have motor traffic and buses on it today. Alarm bells should have been ringing when DDs stopped going over the bridge and only SDs were allowed. That was when a plan (if not before) was needed so DDs could go over the bridge, and the bridge maintained so that remained the case. Now in my view, government, TfL and H&F Council need to get together, sort out the funding and get bridge properly repaired so traffic can use it again. If need be I would not object to a toll to fund it, so long as it would be truly impossible to continue the toll once the bridge had been paid for. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Sept 21, 2023 12:24:43 GMT
Easiest solution would be to leave the bridge alone and build a new one right next to it, but that would also never happen in this country. For me the bridge should have been properly maintained in the first place so it never deteriorated into the current mess it is in. Then you would still have motor traffic and buses on it today. Alarm bells should have been ringing when DDs stopped going over the bridge and only SDs were allowed. That was when a plan (if not before) was needed so DDs could go over the bridge, and the bridge maintained so that remained the case. Now in my view, government, TfL and H&F Council need to get together, sort out the funding and get bridge properly repaired so traffic can use it again. If need be I would not object to a toll to fund it, so long as it would be truly impossible to continue the toll once the bridge had been paid for. Think any toll should remain, half the issue is the listed status and unique design. The toll should hopefully ensure its maintained appropriately too. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Sept 21, 2023 12:28:10 GMT
For me the bridge should have been properly maintained in the first place so it never deteriorated into the current mess it is in. Then you would still have motor traffic and buses on it today. Alarm bells should have been ringing when DDs stopped going over the bridge and only SDs were allowed. That was when a plan (if not before) was needed so DDs could go over the bridge, and the bridge maintained so that remained the case. Now in my view, government, TfL and H&F Council need to get together, sort out the funding and get bridge properly repaired so traffic can use it again. If need be I would not object to a toll to fund it, so long as it would be truly impossible to continue the toll once the bridge had been paid for. Think any toll should remain, half the issue is the listed status and unique design. The toll should hopefully ensure its maintained appropriately too. Trouble is if it was tolled who would use it when there are untolled alternatives nearby? |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Sept 21, 2023 12:42:56 GMT
Think any toll should remain, half the issue is the listed status and unique design. The toll should hopefully ensure its maintained appropriately too. Trouble is if it was tolled who would use it when there are untolled alternatives nearby? Fair point, we will probably get a dry run of this when the Blackwall and Silvertown Tunnel get tolled with the Rotherhithe down the road. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 21, 2023 13:21:46 GMT
Think any toll should remain, half the issue is the listed status and unique design. The toll should hopefully ensure its maintained appropriately too. Trouble is if it was tolled who would use it when there are untolled alternatives nearby? Toll all bridges providing that money goes back to the upkeep of said bridges and not siphoned off elsewhere otherwise the only other option is to have no tolls anywhere |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Sept 21, 2023 13:26:03 GMT
Trouble is if it was tolled who would use it when there are untolled alternatives nearby? Toll all bridges providing that money goes back to the upkeep of said bridges and not siphoned off elsewhere otherwise the only other option is to have no tolls anywhere But then why should all bridges be tolled because of H&F incompetence to maintain a bridge properly. Kind of rewards incompetence. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 21, 2023 16:03:30 GMT
Toll all bridges providing that money goes back to the upkeep of said bridges and not siphoned off elsewhere otherwise the only other option is to have no tolls anywhere But then why should all bridges be tolled because of H&F incompetence to maintain a bridge properly. Kind of rewards incompetence. No, you misread me - toll all bridges not to fund Hammersmith Bridge but to find each individual bridge so the toll on Hammersmith Bridge only goes to that, Chelsea Bridge only to that and so on. Or, as I suggested, don't toll any bridge - you can't have a halfway house of where some bridges are tolled but not others otherwise you'll end up with congestion on those bridges without tolls and little money coming through on the tolled ones which defeats the object. |
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Oct 1, 2023 17:10:23 GMT
Can you still walk on the closed part of Silvertown way
|
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Oct 3, 2023 20:43:19 GMT
When will the 275 return to its LOR, it's been diverted via the South Circular for a long time.
|
|
