http://www.skyhighrecruit.info

Skyhigh Recruit UK are seeking only honest, self-motivated people with
a desire to work in the home typing and data entry field, from the
comfort of their own homes.

The preferred applicants should be at least 18 years old with Internet
access. No experience is needed. However the following skills are
desirable:

1. Basic computer and typing skills
2. Ability to spell and print neatly
3. Ability to follow directions

You will need..

1. A computer with Internet access
2. A valid email address
3. Good typing skills
4. Basic Internet knowledge

Whats involved?

You will be processing orders from your computer. How much you earn is
up to you.

The average earnings are £250 - £750 per week, depending on if you
are working part or full time.

Complete training provided, apply now!

admin@skyhighrecruit.info
http://www.skyhighrecruit.info

On Fri, 16 May 2008 10:37:37 -0700 (PDT), admin@skyhighrecruit.info
said in
:

>Skyhigh Recruit UK are seeking only honest, self-motivated people with
>a desire to work in the home typing and data entry field, from the
>comfort of their own homes.

This is, what, to replace the dishonest spamming bastards they
currently employ?

Guy
-- 
May contain traces of irony.  Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Source: http://www.cnplus.co.uk

Arup has released its proposals for a high speed rail line connecting
Heathrow to the north of the country.

The line would run as far as Edinburgh and Glasgow via Birmingham and
Manchester.

Full Story..

http://www.cnplus.co.uk/News/2008/05/arup_proposes_heathrow_high_speed_rail.html

On May 16, 10:17 pm, jcurr...@googlemail.com wrote:
> Source:http://www.cnplus.co.uk
>
> Arup has released its proposals for a high speed rail line connecting
> Heathrow to the north of the country.
>
> The line would run as far as Edinburgh and Glasgow via Birmingham and
> Manchester.
>
> Full Story..
>
> http://www.cnplus.co.uk/News/2008/05/arup_proposes_heathrow_high_spee...

Is this news ?

--
Nick

jcurry99@googlemail.com wrote:

> Arup has released its proposals for a high speed rail line connecting
> Heathrow to the north of the country.
> 
> The line would run as far as Edinburgh and Glasgow via Birmingham and
> Manchester.

    So no need for another runway at Heathrow - just use the spare capacity 
at the other airports....


-- 
              Just because I've written it doesn't mean that
                   either you or I have to believe it.

On May 16, 11:35�pm, Big and Blue  wrote:
> jcurr...@googlemail.com wrote:
> > Arup has released its proposals for a high speed rail line connecting
> > Heathrow to the north of the country.
>
> > The line would run as far as Edinburgh and Glasgow via Birmingham and
> > Manchester.
>
> � � So no need for another runway at Heathrow - just use the spare capacity
> at the other airports....
>
> --
> � � � � � � � Just because I've written it doesn't mean that
> � � � � � � � � � �either you or I have to believe it.

Try:

http://www.cnplus.co.uk/News/2008/05/arup_proposes_heathrow_high_speed_rail.html

On 16 May, 23:35, Big and Blue  wrote:
> jcurr...@googlemail.com wrote:
> > Arup has released its proposals for a high speed rail line connecting
> > Heathrow to the north of the country.
>
> > The line would run as far as Edinburgh and Glasgow via Birmingham and
> > Manchester.
>
>     So no need for another runway at Heathrow - just use the spare capacity
> at the other airports....

Why? Heathrow isn't just O&D. Lots of people change flights there -
that's how hubs work, after all. Heathrow is a hub.

I doubt that passengers changing flights at Heathrow would be OK with
going through immigrations & customs, taking a train to another city,
and passing though more bureaucratic hoops, before they could continue
their journey.

bobrayner wrote:
> On 16 May, 23:35, Big and Blue  wrote:
>> jcurr...@googlemail.com wrote:
>>> Arup has released its proposals for a high speed rail line connecting
>>> Heathrow to the north of the country.
>>> The line would run as far as Edinburgh and Glasgow via Birmingham and
>>> Manchester.
>>     So no need for another runway at Heathrow - just use the spare capacity
>> at the other airports....
> 
> Why? Heathrow isn't just O&D. Lots of people change flights there -
> that's how hubs work, after all. Heathrow is a hub.

I'd like to see the statistics about how many of those people are 
transferring between one international flight and another, compared with 
those changing between an international flight and a domestic flight.  I 
suspect there's a lot more of the latter.

I also expect that where people are changing from one international 
flight to another, most of those involve one leg that is within the EU.

Amsterdam and Frankfurt are much better places to change flights than 
Heathrow, IMO.

> I doubt that passengers changing flights at Heathrow would be OK with
> going through immigrations & customs, taking a train to another city,
> and passing though more bureaucratic hoops, before they could continue
> their journey.

If the passengers are substituting a rail journey for an internal flight 
(as many do now in Germany, where some ICE trains also have Lufthansa 
flight numbers), then this is a non-issue.

Also, for those people transferring to/from EU destinations, the issues 
of border control would be much reduced if we (the British) would grow 
up and join Schengen.

-- 
Jeremy Double
 {real email address, include the nospam!}
Steam and transport photos at:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmdouble/collections/72157603834894248/

In message , at 10:57:50 on
Sat, 17 May 2008, Jeremy Double  remarked:
>>Heathrow isn't just O&D. Lots of people change flights there -
>> that's how hubs work, after all. Heathrow is a hub.
>
>I'd like to see the statistics about how many of those people are
>transferring between one international flight and another, compared
>with those changing between an international flight and a domestic
>flight.  I suspect there's a lot more of the latter.

I suspect you are wrong. The attraction of Heathrow, to the
International passenger (and the airlines) is that there are more
international destinations served than any other airport (bar Frankfurt
which has recently overtaken it).

35% of passengers in 2004 are transit:

<http://www.hacan.org.uk/resources/reports/hacan.transfers_and_transits.
pdf>

26% of passengers in 2006 are International transit (this has to mean
International to International, as otherwise the figure would be
higher):

<http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transpo
rt/article3926496.ece>

So about 10% are Domestic to International transit.

Also, as a sniff-test, the majority of domestic transfers will be BA,
who "only" have 40% of the airport's traffic. They have 4 million
domestic passengers predicted to use T5. Even if every single one of
those was a transit passenger, that's only 6% of the airport throughput.

>I also expect that where people are changing from one international
>flight to another, most of those involve one leg that is within the EU.

That's slightly more likely. (And perversely, the only time I've ever
transited Heathrow was on a Mainland EU to USA trip, on BA of all
carriers).

>Amsterdam and Frankfurt are much better places to change flights than
>Heathrow, IMO.

I would always choose Amsterdam over Heathrow. Not yet tried Frankfurt,
as it hasn't come up in any of the schedules.

>Also, for those people transferring to/from EU destinations, the issues
>of border control would be much reduced if we (the British) would grow
>up and join Schengen.

Depends where they came from. If outside Schengen, then they'd have to
go through an immigration process, on arrival at Heathrow, that's
apparently more stringent than usual - because they are being let into
the whole of the Schengen area, and not just UK.

So someone flying USA-UK-Germany (for example) would have to do their
Schengen immigration at Heathrow instead of Germany. All it does is
shift the process to the middle of the flight - which you might say was
also less convenient as it risks missing the connection because of the
queues. At the moment they'll just be in transit to the flight to
Germany, and all the formalities will be at the far end, which can be
done while waiting for baggage to arrive.

Similarly, someone arriving *from* a Schengen country, to depart
anywhere, isn't currently going through immigration, so what's the
advantage?
-- 
Roland Perry

On Sat, 17 May 2008 01:26:37 -0700 (PDT), ibilola1@aol.com wrote:

>Try:
>
>http://www.cnplus.co.uk/News/2008/05/arup_proposes_heathrow_high_speed_rail.html

You need to subscribe to read.  Do you have a non-subscription link or
can you post a short extract?

On May 17, 7:12�pm, G  wrote:
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 01:26:37 -0700 (PDT), ibilo...@aol.com wrote:
> >Try:
>
> >http://www.cnplus.co.uk/News/2008/05/arup_proposes_heathrow_high_spee...
>
> You need to subscribe to read. �Do you have a non-subscription link or
> can you post a short extract?


The article is as follows:

'Arup proposes Heathrow high speed rail

Published: 16 May 2008 11:20 Author: Andrea Klettner More by this
Author Last Updated: 16 May 2008 11:43


Arup has released its proposals for a high speed rail line connecting
Heathrow to the north of the country.

The line would run as far as Edinburgh and Glasgow via Birmingham and
Manchester.

Director at Arup Mark Bostock said: "The proposal to link Heathrow
into the rail network would enable people travelling from some of
Heathrow's principal markets to arrive at the airport by train.

"Moreover, these plans fit in with emerging proposals to extend high
speed rail lines north. Looking to the future, we could see travel
times from Heathrow to Leeds and Manchester by rail reduced to less
than two hours."

Arup's proposal would also see Heathrow become the first stop on an
extended high speed rail network that currently terminates at King's
Cross St Pancras, which would link the airport directly with
continental Europe.

The consultant has been in talks with BAA, airlines, local councils
and Government about the plans.

Part of the work involved identifying more than 22 potential sites for
the new terminal and settled on an area approximately 3km north of the
existing T5.'

"G"  wrote in message
news:gu7u24hm385ddn9a25u1llrc1nf8kt573u@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 01:26:37 -0700 (PDT), ibilola1@aol.com wrote:
>
> >Try:
> >
>
>http://www.cnplus.co.uk/News/2008/05/arup_proposes_heathrow_high_speed_rail
.html
>
> You need to subscribe to read.  Do you have a non-subscription link or
> can you post a short extract?

There's a report in this week's Railway Herald
http://www.railwayherald.co.uk/issues/RHUK/Issue131.pdf
Page 8.

Peter

jcurry99@googlemail.com wrote in
news:0d1bce16-ab7b-4d06-af94-3275e7416763@k1g2000prb.googlegroups.com: 

> Source: http://www.cnplus.co.uk
> 
> Arup has released its proposals for a high speed rail line connecting
> Heathrow to the north of the country.
> 
> The line would run as far as Edinburgh and Glasgow via Birmingham and
> Manchester.
> 
> Full Story..
> 
> http://www.cnplus.co.uk/News/2008/05/arup_proposes_heathrow_high_speed_
> rail.html 

I'd rather see the existing rail network improved so we don't need domestic 
air travel for our fast city-to-city journies.

"Roland Perry"  wrote in message
news:ckc2cc4UirLIFADO@perry.co.uk
> In message , at 10:57:50 on
> Sat, 17 May 2008, Jeremy Double  remarked:
>
>> Amsterdam and Frankfurt are much better places to change flights than
>> Heathrow, IMO.
>
> I would always choose Amsterdam over Heathrow. Not yet tried
> Frankfurt, as it hasn't come up in any of the schedules.

Amsterdam has the rare advantage for a busy airport of having a single 
terminal, which greatly faciliates transfers. Frankfurt has two, with a 
skytrain link, and Heathrow (temporarily) has five.

ibilola1@aol.com wrote:
(quoting Arup)
> high speed rail network that currently terminates at King's
> Cross St Pancras

Statements like that don't inspire confidence, do they?

-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9633114.html
(58 023 at Oxford, 10 Jun 1985)

Am Sat, 17 May 2008 19:37:49 UTC,  schrieb "Peter Masson" 
  auf uk.railway :

>  
> There's a report in this week's Railway Herald
> http://www.railwayherald.co.uk/issues/RHUK/Issue131.pdf
> Page 8.

  with the most interesting part being the layout and placement of a 
"Heathrow Rail Hub" on the GWML. 


Cheers, 
L.W.

In message , at 22:04:17 on 
Sat, 17 May 2008, Recliner <nigelp@clara.co_dot_uk> remarked:
>> I would always choose Amsterdam over Heathrow. Not yet tried
>> Frankfurt, as it hasn't come up in any of the schedules.
>
>Amsterdam has the rare advantage for a busy airport of having a single
>terminal, which greatly faciliates transfers.

Amsterdam has very good airside transfers (something which they seem to 
have completely overlooked at Charles deGaulle, where even when in the 
same "Terminal" you can be forced to go landside to get from one set of 
"gates" to another).

However, Schiphol is arguably three terminals albeit well connected 
together [like LHR T1 and T2]: landside they have Departures 1, 2 & 3 
areas. "1" is the Schengen gates, separated airside from "2" by 
immigration and security. "3" is the newer international terminal, 
linked airside to "2" by the 'Holland Boulevard' (a long corridor with 
shops).
-- 
Roland Perry

In message 
          "Peter Masson"  wrote:


> "G"  wrote in message
> news:gu7u24hm385ddn9a25u1llrc1nf8kt573u@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 17 May 2008 01:26:37 -0700 (PDT), ibilola1@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>>Try:
>>>
>>
>>http://www.cnplus.co.uk/News/2008/05/arup_proposes_heathrow_high_speed_rail
> .html
>>
>> You need to subscribe to read.  Do you have a non-subscription link or
>> can you post a short extract?

> There's a report in this week's Railway Herald
> http://www.railwayherald.co.uk/issues/RHUK/Issue131.pdf
> Page 8.

> Peter

It seems a very strange way to publish so important a proposal. Well, 
actually, it doesn't propose high-speed links to the North, Wales, 
Scotland. It merely proposes a loop off existing routes to those 
places into Heathrow, in the same way as Stansted is served. I can't 
see it going ahead in this form.

Michael Bell


--

Michael Bell  wrote:

>In message 
>          "Peter Masson"  wrote:
>
>
>> "G"  wrote in message
>> news:gu7u24hm385ddn9a25u1llrc1nf8kt573u@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 17 May 2008 01:26:37 -0700 (PDT), ibilola1@aol.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>Try:
>>>>
>>>
>>>http://www.cnplus.co.uk/News/2008/05/arup_proposes_heathrow_high_speed_rail
>> .html
>>>
>>> You need to subscribe to read.  Do you have a non-subscription link or
>>> can you post a short extract?
>
>> There's a report in this week's Railway Herald
>> http://www.railwayherald.co.uk/issues/RHUK/Issue131.pdf
>> Page 8.
>
>> Peter
>
>It seems a very strange way to publish so important a proposal. Well, 
>actually, it doesn't propose high-speed links to the North, Wales, 
>Scotland. It merely proposes a loop off existing routes to those 
>places into Heathrow, in the same way as Stansted is served. I can't 
>see it going ahead in this form.


Try reading the article again.  It suggests Heathrow as "the first
stop on an extended high speed rail network that currently terminates
at Kings Cross St Pancras".  The red line on the lower of the two maps
accompanying the article represents a future high speed line.

In message , at 16:30:28 on 
Mon, 19 May 2008, Tony Polson  remarked:
>Try reading the article again.  It suggests Heathrow as "the first
>stop on an extended high speed rail network that currently terminates
>at Kings Cross St Pancras".

Perhaps the witty point someone was trying to make is that CTRL2 
terminates at St Pancras International, while only TFL's subsurface and 
tube trains call at Kings Cross St Pancras.
-- 
Roland Perry