Propulsion
Topic Author
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 12:10 pm

I posted this elsewhere, but feel it would appeal as a topic of its own:

I very much hope that the London 2012 bid fails. I refuse to back the bid and would rather see it go to Paris or New York. Taxpayers money has been wasted on this as the time is not right and the plans are flawd. There are several reasons for this.

I don't believe it will actually be crippling to the transport system as a whole. London Bus Services are quite simply the best in the world and already have sufficient extra capacity.

The Undergound will not see a rise in passenger numbers that will prevent it from running safely, but it will undoubtedly be very busy.

The main problems are:

1.) The millenium dome - need I say more? What a farce!

2.) The UK has an appalling record on completing or even deciding on the planning stages of any transport project. We are still waiting for Thameslink 2000 which was designed in the 1980's as well as CrossRail (Which I am sure WILL NOT be ready in time if the track reocrd is followed).

3.) We always go overbudget and overrun on suh projects. We waste billions of pounds on rubbish while most people cannot afford a home anywhere in the country.

4.) The areas selected - Hackney, Dalston, Stratford etc - need jobs for local people and real affordable housing. NOT MORE LUXURY APARTMENTS AND USELESS STADIA.

5.) The transport link that London has been BEGGING FOR YEARS TO HAVE is to put EUROPES 2ND BUSIEST TRAIN STATION (and the UK's 1st) - CLAPHAM JUNCTION ON THE UNDERGOUND. When???

6.) People are not crying out for the East London Line Extension as much as the CrossRail 2 link, which almost certainly will not be built at the rate we are going.

7.) Furthermore, Olympics indebt countries and rarely provide long term benefits for local people - especially if they are so hastily put together like the dreaded London bid.

8.) The land for development could be used more wisely. We couldn;t even get Lea Valley's Lesirue Centre replaced near Northumberland park, so how are we to successfully redevlop much of the entire Lea Valley itself.

9.) London needs an outer Circle Line - but such lines often don't bring much money in (just look at the Hammersmith & City Line for instance). The reason is partially obivious, but also because there are not sufficient links ouside zone one, so people are forced into and out of the central area unnecessarily. (ALSO TO CHRAGE MORE ON TRAVELCARDS OF COURSE!!!)

10.) Paris and New York are more derserving in my opinion.
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
WindowSeat
Posts: 1198
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 3:01 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 12:16 pm

Wow, Propulsion, aren't you on a roll...especially for 4.15 am!  Big grin

In all seriousness, all the points you made here are absolutely valid and you have made it to my RU list.

Just look at Athens and its financials after the Olympics. Think about it, security in London itself will cost twice that of Athens, unless of course, Londoners are ready to shell out billions out of their pockets to watch some fireworks.


cheers


I'm all in favour of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with keyboards.
 
Propulsion
Topic Author
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 12:20 pm

WidowSeat: I have sent you a reply to your e-mail. It usually takes a little while to appear though.

Yes, don't you find you go on a roll every so often. Maybe it is because I have not been posting much recently.

Thank you so much for talking and all your useful and considerate input. I will go to sleep now, but do make sure you get round to checking you e-mail sometime soon. Big thumbs up
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
Propulsion
Topic Author
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 12:21 pm

The roll has taken its effect!!! - I meant WindowSeat!  Laugh out loud Laugh out loud Laugh out loud
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
csavel
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 9:38 pm

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 12:21 pm

Here, here Propulsion!

And the Olympics will come to New York in 2012 over my freakin' dead body!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I may be ugly. I may be an American. But don't call me an ugly American.
 
Propulsion
Topic Author
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 12:31 pm


Csavel:

I guess that leaves Madrid and may favourtie Paris!!!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Goodnight all.
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 12:39 pm

And what happens if a city starts to build a lot of stadia to impress the IOC, but doesn´t get the bid? Just look at Berlin!
Good that they didn´t get the olympics, the city is broke enough!

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
lewis
Posts: 3564
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 1999 5:41 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 6:44 pm

Since I am not British I had no idea that there are all these problems mentioned. The first things that came in mind was lack of space and lack of roads. For Athens it was easy in most parts to build wider and better roads but London is more densely built.
Even if the 2004 Olympics probably harmed Athens financially, they were an excuse to bring the level of infrastructure to that of a modern city. I bet that without hosting the Olympics we would still be using the old airport (the new one was planed from the 80's and the govt speeded up its building to impress the IOC), we wouldn't have the underground, the tram and many highways and roads that we enjoy today.
London of course has an excellent transport system but maybe because of the possibility of hosting the games they would think about renovating parts or all the underground system.
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:32 pm

So what airport is London planning to use to handle the extra Olympic traffic ? I trust not LHR or LGW, as these are already bursting at the seams. Perhaps they'll use STN again, like the "Millenium Gateway" airport for the Dome HAHAHAHAHAHA - yes, that was SUCH a success.

I would agree that London should concentrate on getting the tube and the rail network up to speed, rather than more useless white elephant stadia and more luxury East-end flatettes for red-braces-wearing investment wankers.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
bennett123
Posts: 7426
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 7:48 pm


I think that a project based on Lea Valley could be feasible, the problem is firstly the backers would want to draw a link to Wembley or Tourist London

Firstly LHR/LGW do not have the capacity and frankly STN is one of my least favourite airports. To use it as a gateway is IMO a non starter.

Secondly the road congestion in Central London, which I understand extends to the North/South Circular. Why do you think congestion charging was introduced.

Then there are the Buses/London Underground. Anyone who has tried it during the peak periods, which can be surprisinly long would not suggest it even for their worst enemy. I know that we are trying to bring the world together, but there are limits.

Finally, every major London based project in recent years was a disaster,
like the Millenium Dome, a damp squib like Millenium Night that London Underground and the Metropltan Police tried to cancel. The reason given that having so many people is Central London was unsafe.

Until the people who run this country get organised then NO, having the Olympics in London is a Non Starter.
 
Gman94
Posts: 1167
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 2:56 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:05 pm

Well done Propulsion for taking the typical British attitude of running our country down.

The benefits of recent Olympics have far outweighed the negatives, it's about time this country hosted the games for it's merits and not stepping in at the last minute like the previous occasions that we've hosted the games.

I hope we do it, we can do it and it will be a huge success. Back the bid and stop knocking our country.
British Airways - The Way To Fly
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:39 pm

Well done Propulsion for taking the typical British attitude of running our country down.

It's people like Propulsion who are quite happy to sit back and critise anything and everything without stopping to think. If rail links are delayed, Propulsion won't try to analyse why - he'll merely blame it on 'the government', 'kids' or if he takes the Daily Mail approach, 'asylum seekers'.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
keno
Posts: 1809
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:46 pm

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:40 pm

In the UK you will almost hear these issues on a daily basis :-
1. improve the NHS
2. more schools
3. scrap university tuition fees

London 2012 will only get public support if the British government can surrender to the demands above.
I doubt very much it'll happen anytime soon, if ever.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:43 pm

In the UK you will almost hear these issues on a daily basis :-
1. improve the NHS
2. more schools
3. scrap university tuition fees

The thing is the NHS has improved. Whether you support Labour or not, you cannot deny that the NHS has improved since 1997. People don't want more schools, they want current schools improved. And trust me, university tuition fees will never be scrapped, whichever party comes into power.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
keno
Posts: 1809
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:46 pm

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:50 pm

Edited : I meant to say more money for schools.

2.) The UK has an appalling record on completing or even deciding on the planning stages of any transport project. We are still waiting for Thameslink 2000 which was designed in the 1980's as well as CrossRail (Which I am sure WILL NOT be ready in time if the track reocrd is followed).

This is the main reason why the IOC should never let London get the Olympics. Yes I know transport system is only a part of the whole Olympic infrastructure but it just goes to show a prime example of UK government's inefficiency (Labour or Tory). Now just look at the new Wembley project...

NHS has improved? Yes according to statistics/targets-obsessed Labour. But the whole picture is still a shamble, certainly not fit for the people of one of the world's superpowers. I myself had to wait 4 months just to see a consultant, let alone have a treatment but luckily it wasn't serious. I dread to think what it would be like for a cancer patient!

[Edited 2004-09-23 16:05:18]
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:41 am

As a frequent NHS user since 2000, not a Daily Mail writer, I can state from experience that the service has improved, a lot.
Guess what, everyone I know who have experience of it in recent years think the same.

Transport is much slower in improving, but it is as much the NIMBYs than any government fault.

The Dome is not a good example to use, the Olympics are understood, which you cannot say for the Dome, no one really knew what do do with this project, with hindsight, Labour should have axed it.

However, what do I care, because I did not pay for it!
Because I have never played the National Lottery, (please don't say 'what about the other Lottery funded things that suffered', like anyone trying for the 14 million to one chance of winning gives a stuff about good causes!)
I actually found it all amusing, remembering the old quote from (I think) Samuel Johnson "A lottery is a tax on the poor and stupid".

If anything, a successful Olympic bid would have to improve transport, and sod the NIMBYS, it took the Dome to get the Jubilee Line extension done after all.
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Fri Sep 24, 2004 3:04 am

With regard to an Olympic bid, the issues germane to London itself also apply to the larger world and raise some interesting questions.

At what price?

Ultimately, isn't that what everyone should be asking? At what price? What is the cost of hosting an Olympiad? And is it worth it? Is the massive infrastructure spending, pork barrel projects, under the table deals, land swaps, all worth it?

And if so, at what price?

Since the Atlanta games, each host city seems to have been on an increasingly orgasmic spending spree to juice up their cities' infrastructure, etc.
 
Delboy
Posts: 689
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 12:57 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Fri Sep 24, 2004 11:10 pm

Lack of spelling and grammar notwithstanding, care to cite any examples?

It's people like Propulsion who are quite happy to sit back and critise


777236ER...Always nice to see a smart arse shoot themselves in the foot. NEVER take the 'p' out of someones spelling, then go and do the same yourself. Just makes you look even more foolish!!
 
babybus
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 5:07 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Fri Sep 24, 2004 11:52 pm

My problem with bringing the Olympics to London is that it is probably going to be another ill conceived white elephant. We don't normally actively promote sports in this country, rather we try and encourage people to buy the over priced kit and sit in front of the telly with crisps and coke from Sainsbury's and watch Man Utd. Kids at school only get about an hour of sport a week so we won't be seeing any of them on the track in 2012!

Even Mr Livingstone pretends that somehow it will mark a renaissance of active sport participation in this country. I doubt it. And all that talk of developing an academy for sporting excellence is tosh. Crystal Palace (the national sports centre) has been open for over 40 years now but there is no academy of sporting excellence there and its also seriously running out of money.

Before spending tax payers money on yet another free jamboree for posh people let us see evidence of sport commitment by developing Crystal Palace first and not the panic "quickly do it up" scam they are playing at now.

Cheers fellow sports lovers!

and with that..cabin crew, seats for landing please.
 
David_itl
Posts: 5946
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2001 7:39 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 5:51 am

Evidence of sports commitment is already in place in Manchester; however, I would not be totally surprised if various sporting bodies are "invited" to relocate to a London-based newly built stadia for whatever sport they are in charge of. Plus, I do hope that all new stadia will have tenants per the criteria laid down for Manchester.

The best thing London should do is to sack the current crop of bid leaders and replace them with the hierarachy of the Manchester Commonwealth Games Committee as there would be no "baggage" attached to them other than a successful hosting of the 2nd biggest multi-sports event in the world.

But, ultimately, the Olympics decision will be based on where the corrupt and the freeloaders wish to travel and not on whether the bid city is capable of hosting the athletes in some measure of comfort (fortuitously, Manchester avoided having to build several 5 star hotels just to service them for a 3 week period and then have these white elephants standing proud for any number of years with no occupants).

Oh, forgot something. "Anywhere but London" for the 2012 Olympics!

David
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12361
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 8:48 am

I don't want them in NYC in 2012 either! There is a huge debate over the building of a $1 BILLION ! superstadium with a movable cover of course over passenger rail yards on the west side of Manhattan. Of course, by the time we get done with the stadium, the costs would probably be $2+ Billion, this as we have kids in the Bronx having school classes in closets. While the new stadium would connect with the Javits Convention Center, it would never be used enough to make it profitable.
There is of course, the huge security target that NYC is and will continue to be for a generation and the costs of security. Many Millions were spent for the republican Convention for security, much less than the city made from the convention. Already the transit systems are overloaded at peak times, and an Olympics would be a disaster waiting to happen. If they were to occur in NYC, you would have to have 50% or more people take vacation from their jobs in Manhattan, with deep financial and economic conquences. Already our airports at very busy levels, and expected to be over loaded in future years.

NYC does have some advantages - there is a perfectly fine stadium for sports in NJ, about 10 miles away - Giants stadium. Many other facilities would be available in the NYC and metro area, including many public indoor arenas -Madison Sq. Garden, continental Airlines Arena in NJ, new arenas planned for Newark, NJ and Brooklyn, NY as well as facilities of the many colleges and universities in the Metro area.

To me the only real answer is to have perminate host cities - for both summer and winter Olympics, where the facilities including lodging have been previously been built for Olympics at them. Atlanta, Sydney, Athens, and China's site for 2008 could be possible summer sites, and SLC could be the US site for Winter Olympics, for a Euro host site, perhaps where to be held in Italy in 2006.
 
QANTASforever
Posts: 5794
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 6:03 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:27 am

Slider

Since the Atlanta games, each host city seems to have been on an increasingly orgasmic spending spree to juice up their cities' infrastructure, etc.

True, but in the case of Sydney it made a huge profit out of the games. The NSW government showed that the olympics need not be two weeks of joy and 50 years of financial ruin.

Propulsion -

When (if?) London wins the games and you are watching the opening ceremony on TV, I guarantee that you will be thankful for the bid. Coming from a person who lived through an olympics in his home town, there is always this massive public cynicism toward the buildup - but once the curtain opens, it is the most magical thing on this planet.

QFF
Fighting for the glory of the Australian Republic.
 
Propulsion
Topic Author
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 11:09 am

777236ER: Before being so unnecessarily unfavourable towards my post, swearing at me and then making unfounded claims as to the 'type' of person I am, please care to think.

1.) I am not a 'typical' criticising Brit.
2.) I do not read the Daily Mail. I actually dispise this paper.
3.) If you care to search, I am actually one of the few people who has profound praise for London's transport system.

1.) 'I went, it was awesome. Why does this mean the 2012 olympics will be a farce?'

- You must be the only person in the UK who actually thinks £2bn spent on this is 'awesome'. You must be completely incompetent not to understand the significance of a proven track record in large project management and the link this has to an Olympic bid.

2.) 'Nonsense. Terminal Five at LHR is coming on quite well.'

KOREA WENT THROUGH INDUSTRIALISATION FASTER THAN THE UK GAVE PLANNING CONSENT TO T5. Now let me see, things are progressing very well, aren't they? Albeit, just a DECADE behind schedule.

3.) 'Lack of spelling and grammar notwithstanding, care to cite any examples?'

Everything stated already if you care to read: Thameslink 2000, the Dome, the Jubliee Lne Extension - and then a new chapter for its signalling system too. Crossrail 1 & 2. The East London Line Extension - THESE ARE NOT NEW PROJECTS - MOST INCLUDING T5 ARE NOW OVER 20YEARS OLD AND STILL WAITING WHILE PUBLIC MONEY IS BEING SPENT UNPRODUCTIVELY.

4.) 'it is making a point of putting stadia in poorer areas, in an effort to regenerate those areas.'

Why don't we put a stadium next to your house so your kids 'stop breaking into cars' as you say. Regeneration does not occur by simply throwing money at an area and building things - just look at the Docklands. ALL THE UK SEEMS TO DO IS GENTRIFY AREAS AND THEN MOVE THE 'PROBLEM PEOPLE' AWAY - TAKE A LOOK AT HARLESDEN FOR A GOOD EXAMPLE.

5.) 'What the f*** does this have to do with the Olympic bid?!'
6.) 'Seems you have a problem with Labour's rail policy, not the Olympic bid.'

Your use of the English Language exhibits your stature perfectly. If it has not occurred to you, the IOC believe much of the London bid's success is subject to resolving Transport issues. An orbital link has long been necessary and stated as a solution to some of these. PEOPLE NEED TO GET TO THE OLYMPICS YOU KNOW? - HARD CONCEPT BUT YOU MIGHT JUST GET IT. AND DON'T SWEAR - BEING POLITE DOES NOT HURT.

7.) 'Eight Years away'

yes the Olympics are, but not the bid - and let me see, we really got all the transport programs completed within eight years of their conception, didn't we? I suppose that is why we are still waiting for so many of them!!!

8.) 'Why don't you run for office?'

Why don't you go and get yourself a brain transplant - and make sure the replacement actually works!

9.) 'Nothing to do with the Olympic bid.'

Of course, transport has nothing to do with the Olympic bid as we all know from your teachings.

10.) 'Definitely so - they don't have idiots like you.'

So well placed you are to condemn others as 'idiots' aren't you? This coming from someone who believes the Dome is 'awesome'.
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
Propulsion
Topic Author
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 11:20 am

Gman94:

I am not running the country down. Why are you being so sensationalist? I was simply expressing my points as to why London is not ready to host the Olympics in this particular time frame - i.e. ready by 2012.

Just because I don't back the bid it does not mean I am 'knocking' our country as such.
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
roguetrader
Posts: 1404
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:14 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 12:42 pm

Propulsion is absolutely right.

The Olympics in London is a stupid waste of time. There are a thousand other real improvements that could be made that would benefit everyone RIGHT NOW as opposed to working to get the Olympics for a few weeks 8 years from now.

The Olympics are always wanted by the busy body cheer-leader public figures who just want an ego trip. These people should be forced to do some real work. These people are in every city and get their self importance by imagining that getting the Olympics in their home town makes the rest of the world feel inferior. The Olympics lose money. They are a pain in the ass for the residents. They do -maybe- give a brief ego boost for a few days. Who cares?

In a perfect world, the infrastructure invested on the Olympics should be spent in developing nations. How sick is it that we spend so much money in large wealthy cities for a few days of Olympics when poorer cities elsewhere need investment much more? Have the Olympics in Africa for the next 30 years, and make the rest of us build infrastructure there, where its really needed. London is a great city as it is, it doesn't need an advertisement like the Olympics.

kind regards

RogueTrader
 
Propulsion
Topic Author
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 1:04 pm


RogueTrader:

Thank you kindly for your input. You have made some fantastic points and I agree that the money would be better spent helping Africa and those more needy in both developed and developing nations.

It is also very true that certain public policy decision makers tend to have an ego trip with regards to such projects.

Many thanks for your constructive input. You have been propelled to my respected users list for sheer considerate debate - a fresh change to what this particular thread has been exposed to of late.  Big thumbs up Thank you also for helping to indicate how these forums should really operate as a medium for debate.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
jasepl
Posts: 3499
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 3:15 pm

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 6:42 pm

I wouldn't wish the Olympics on any city. Not even the poor Chinese, whose government seem to have sold them on the idea that hosting a games is the only way to showing the world that China have "arrived".

What a complete waste of money and resources. And what's sad is that sometimes cities want the Olympics because that's the only way they would get better roads, railways, airports etc.

I'm relieved that my city will probably never be able to hold something on the scale of an Olympics.

[Edited 2004-09-25 11:46:13]
 
User avatar
BNE
Posts: 2921
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2000 9:37 pm

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 6:43 pm

I very much hope that the London 2012 bid fails, if everyone has that attitude in England then you never get it.

Hosting an Olympic games does amazing things, people who previously had opposing views on things sudden start working together to get things done.

As Lewis from Greece said, it gives the government a reason and a time definite goal to get projects finished that would otherwise not get done for ages. Its a good way for the government to spend a heap of money of infrastructure that would otherwise go undone.

You point to all these infrastructure problems that can then get fixed if you were to host an Olympics.

Just think if you were to hold an Olympics in the UK, then the British team might have a better supporting record. More gold medals which will make everyone in your country happier.
Why fly non stop when you can connect
 
bennett123
Posts: 7426
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 7:13 pm

First point is that there is more to the Olympics than infrastructure.

However, most of the doubts are either Infrastructural or Financial.

I would be interested to know the following, what was the initial and actual (or current estimated) cost and initial and actual (or current estimated) completion dates for the following projects;

Millenium Dome

Channel Tunnel

Terminal 5 at LHR

Crossrail

Thameslink 2000

I think that we should focus on the infrastructure, rather than getting into a lather about the Olympics.

Two concluding points;

Is it true that the Railways punctuality and reliability is still below pre Hatfield levels. Can anyone remind of the date of the Hatfield crash.

Can any of the Dome's fans tell us when it opened, when it closed and it's current use.
 
jasepl
Posts: 3499
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2004 3:15 pm

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 7:33 pm

Is it true that the Railways punctuality and reliability is still below pre Hatfield levels

I don't know about Hatfield, but the railways in India are more punctual and reliable than in Britain. Imagine that. India!
 
L-188
Posts: 29874
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 8:25 pm

NYC does have some advantages

Water polo in the east river???

OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Alessandro
Posts: 4962
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:13 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 9:09 pm

I hope the 2012 games goes to either South America or Africa, my first choice would be Brasilia the capital of Brazil, then Cape town. But since South Africa is already hosting the soccer WC, I think Brasilia would be the best option...
From New Yorqatar to Califarbia...
 
lewis
Posts: 3564
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 1999 5:41 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:52 pm

To me the only real answer is to have perminate host cities - for both summer and winter Olympics, where the facilities including lodging have been previously been built for Olympics at them. Atlanta, Sydney, Athens, and China's site for 2008 could be possible summer sites, and SLC could be the US site for Winter Olympics, for a Euro host site, perhaps where to be held in Italy in 2006.

The Olympics were great here, lost of people around and they game me an opportunity to get a job with decent pay. On the other hand I wouldn't like Athens to be hosting the Olympics every now and then. Apart from the festivities its a real pain for the citizens of the city (Olympic lanes on roads cause congestions, public transport is cut down to mostly serve the events and venues etc, too many security measures that slow things down).
 
Propulsion
Topic Author
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Mon Sep 27, 2004 7:52 am


Many interesting points have been made. The railways in England are simply terrible, with the exception of a select number of services. It was not privatisation that ruined the industry, but the manner in which it was privatised - of course we have the lesson of National Bus deregulation to show why London Buses was not wholly deregulated in the same way (if it were so, we would have ten operators on profitable routes such as the 281 and absolutely none on the likes of important urban fringe feeder links such as the 464 - Thank God that didn't happen!).

The Olympics are a truly spectacular event and there is nothing I have against their achievements and role in international sports. What I hate is how we have to cope with appalling conditions and poor use of money 99% of the time and be all encompassing when the government decides to spend 1% of the time tarting up a particular location at horrendous cost to host them.

Why should we rush CrossRail solely for the Olympic bid, when we have been crying out for this and Thameslink 2000 since the mid 1980's?
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:39 am

You must be the only person in the UK who actually thinks £2bn spent on this is 'awesome'. You must be completely incompetent not to understand the significance of a proven track record in large project management and the link this has to an Olympic bid.

It was £2bn well spent. Did you go? Britain has a great record of large project management.

KOREA WENT THROUGH INDUSTRIALISATION FASTER THAN THE UK GAVE PLANNING CONSENT TO T5. Now let me see, things are progressing very well, aren't they? Albeit, just a DECADE behind schedule.

Nonsense, terminal five was never, and shouldn't have been approved, until well into the late 90s.

Everything stated already if you care to read: Thameslink 2000, the Dome, the Jubliee Lne Extension - and then a new chapter for its signalling system too. Crossrail 1 & 2. The East London Line Extension - THESE ARE NOT NEW PROJECTS - MOST INCLUDING T5 ARE NOW OVER 20YEARS OLD AND STILL WAITING WHILE PUBLIC MONEY IS BEING SPENT UNPRODUCTIVELY.

All save the Done being RAILWAY related. Maybe the RAILWAYS have a problem.

Why don't we put a stadium next to your house so your kids 'stop breaking into cars' as you say. Regeneration does not occur by simply throwing money at an area and building things - just look at the Docklands. ALL THE UK SEEMS TO DO IS GENTRIFY AREAS AND THEN MOVE THE 'PROBLEM PEOPLE' AWAY - TAKE A LOOK AT HARLESDEN FOR A GOOD EXAMPLE.

The UK? You're talking about London here bud. Maybe you have a problem with the London councils? I live in Manchester, and as far as I can see the commonwealth's sporting facilities have done wonders for people here.

If it has not occurred to you, the IOC believe much of the London bid's success is subject to resolving Transport issues. An orbital link has long been necessary and stated as a solution to some of these. PEOPLE NEED TO GET TO THE OLYMPICS YOU KNOW?

You're still talking nonsense. You talk about a poor record of building transport infrastructure then say that we can't build stadia etc. The IOC seem pretty happy with the bid, perhaps you should read this: http://www.london2012.org/en/bid/transport/

Why don't you go and get yourself a brain transplant - and make sure the replacement actually works!

You love to moan and whine about everything without doing anything. Go on, tell us what you'd do differently and how you'd do it with all the red tape and finance issues. If you think things are so bad at least tell us what you'd do differently.

Of course, transport has nothing to do with the Olympic bid as we all know from your teachings.

Whining about how long it takes you to get places on the train has very little to do with the Olympic bid.

So well placed you are to condemn others as 'idiots' aren't you? This coming from someone who believes the Dome is 'awesome'.

Did you go?

The Olympics in London is a stupid waste of time. There are a thousand other real improvements that could be made that would benefit everyone RIGHT NOW as opposed to working to get the Olympics for a few weeks 8 years from now.

Examples, please.

Is it true that the Railways punctuality and reliability is still below pre Hatfield levels. Can anyone remind of the date of the Hatfield crash.

Read this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3523318.stm. As someone who uses the railways at least 4 times a week, I can tell you they're improving, especially up here.

Can any of the Dome's fans tell us when it opened, when it closed and it's current use.

Opened in 2000, closed in 2000, nothing. It was the Millenium Dome, afterall. It was impressive. Care to tell us a bit more about the London eye, regeneration in Manchester after the bomb, the Commonwealth Games, M6 toll road, M60, the Heathrow Express, Imperial War Museum North, Magna, Free View, the Bullring and Birmingham City Centre in general, broadband infrastructure, regeneration of both the West Coast and East Coast lines - with Virgin's Pendolinos and Voyagers and GNER's refurbished trains, matrix signs on all major motorways, etc. Suddenly Britain's 'awful' infrastructure record looks pretty good, doesn't it?

The railways in England are simply terrible, with the exception of a select number of services.

I think it's clearly the other way around - the railways are pretty good with the exception of a few services, which you obviously use.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
Propulsion
Topic Author
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Mon Sep 27, 2004 10:29 am

777236ER: Let me deal with some of your points.

'£2bn well spent' = are you actually sane? How many hosptials, schools, social housing schemes, youth hostels, transport improvements, local authority services could that have paid for? - And all for a worthless day out in what must be the most wasted development opportunity in London. My God - you could even have replaced the Jubilee Line Extension's problem ridden signal system twice over for that! or may be just spent it elsewhere on the crumbling Underground.

Would you please get your head out of the sand and start to make valid points without attacking me for no reason. Look beyond the silly hype and spin - http://www.london2012.org/en/bid/transport/ - is the largest load of rubbish I have ever read. WE HAVE BEEN PROMISED THIS FOR 20YEARS.

GET IT INTO YOUR BRAIN: LONDON 2012 DID NOT CREATE THESE NEW TRANSPORT PROJECTS!!! THEY WERE NEEDED BEFORE AND THE BID HIGHLIGHTS THEIR INCREASED NECESSITY BUT IS USING IT AS A MEANS OF CONJURING ILLUSIONS OF IMPROVEMENTS AND NEAR FUTURE REALISATION!

CONTINUED....
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
Propulsion
Topic Author
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Mon Sep 27, 2004 10:36 am

CONTINUED…

ROADS = Do you seriously believe that erecting dot matrix signs along motorways is sufficient criteria to render Britain's transport infrastructure as good? And who claimed the roads were bad in the first place? What on Earth are you going on about my so-called apparent 'whinning' when you clearly appear lost as to what the focus of this thread is.

WCML = Moreover, the entire West Coast Main Line Project has gone from a great idea to complete farce. The program of Virgin's Pendolinos and Voyagers has been severely delayed and altered to the point where much of its value has been eroded. The budget affectively tripled and all this so that Britian can run some trains at speeds which are still considerably slower and behind development levels in other European Nations.

CRTL = The Channel Tunnel Rail Link was promised to us since the early 1990's. It was delayed with expectations of reality nearing the end of the 1990's. It was then cast aside, only to be ressurrected at enormous expense (and damage by ripping through the Kent countryside) so as to shave roughly 20minutes-30minutes from London to Paris on a train service that has proved comparatively unpopular to the already available and newer air services.

GNER = GNER's refurbished HST sets are a result of continued argument within the rail industry as to whether a new High Speed Train (HST) set should be developed to replace the Intercity Class 125's and Locomotive based Class 91 Intercity 225 trains. In the current climate of preference for electric and diesel multiple units (EMU's & DMU's), it is not an achievement to tart up 30year old trains. The appearance of Class 373 TGV ‘Eurostar/White Rose’ sets on this route has been due to another government blunder. Over £180million of public money was wasted on new train sets for 'Regional Eurostar' services to Paris and Brussels - and very popular they proved too! (Yeah, right) Hence they are sitting idle at a depot with the exception of the few run under lease by GNER - a case of using one of the most sophisticated and amazing trains ever built (especially regarding multiple power supply sourcing) to little effective use.

Now let me see, according to you such disasters are clearly evidence of London 2012's apparent readiness and compliance with solving transport related issues to as to be successful.
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
Propulsion
Topic Author
Posts: 282
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 8:30 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Mon Sep 27, 2004 10:38 am

Sorry for error, CTRL not CRTL!
A bus is a vehicle that runs twice as fast when you are after it as when you are in it.
 
csavel
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2001 9:38 pm

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Tue Sep 28, 2004 6:50 am

To me the only real answer is to have perminate host cities - for both summer and winter Olympics, where the facilities including lodging have been previously been built for Olympics at them. Atlanta, Sydney, Athens, and China's site for 2008 could be possible summer sites, and SLC could be the US site for Winter Olympics, for a Euro host site, perhaps where to be held in Italy in 2006.

Why bother having "host cities" at all? In this day and age. One could have the track and field, say in london, and then have the boxing, in Sao Paulo, the Synchronized Swimming in Disneyworld where it belongs, and the equestrian in another city etc., etc. I mean that way, you wouldn't overwhelm a city with huge new publics works monumteh Olympic park that they were paying off twenty years later. We could call it an Olympic year, and have the games open but have them all over the world. Why not?
I may be ugly. I may be an American. But don't call me an ugly American.
 
Sydscott
Posts: 3061
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:50 am

RE: London 2012 - NO Thank You

Wed Sep 29, 2004 10:47 am


I think that Sydney and Melbourne should be alternate as permanent host city for the Summer Games.

1. Sydney has all the infrastructure still there and in perfect working order. Melbourne will be up to par for the Commonwealth Games and after that would be an ideal Olympic city.

2. Both cities have a good public transport system for getting people to and from the Main sites.

3. Both have airports which aren't used to their maximum capacity. Melbourne has plenty of space to expand and no curfew issues. Sydney coped with the 2000 Olympics with flying colours.

4. ALL the events in both cities would sell out. Not like Athens where morning sessions had no-one there and even some finals had half empty stadiums.

5. Everyone looks for an excuse to visit Australia. Why not give them 1 every 4 years????

6. Atlanta was the "toilet" Olympics. Sydney and Salt Lake City crapped all over it. Not to mention a bombing before we had the Terrorism of today.

7. Sydney was "the best Olympic Games ever." Athens was only memorable.

Enough said!!!!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aerlingus747, pvjin, seahawk and 52 guests