please empty your brain below
As far as I'm concerned, if it's possible to build a cablecar across the Thames, and we can get Emirates to pay part of it, then that is good.
I also know this particular route isn't going to be used that much, but I've thought for some time that there's a potential for cable cars to be used more often in more congested parts of town.
In my opinion having a test one as soon as possible (for whatever reason) is a good thing, because it could help lay the foundations for possible others, and cable cars don't cost as much as or cause as much disruption/loss of amenities as other transport constructions.
You don't do the comparison justice. The Woolwich ferry is a vital freight link enabling lorries that cannot use Blackwall or Rotherhithe tunnels to cross the river. If it didn't carry vehicles it would be closed down as soon as they could get the necessary legislation through parliament. The fact it carries foot passengers (drivers count as passengers in the statistics supplied by the way) is merely a bonus. However most foot passengers will be genuine passengers who for practical reasons choose this as a means of getting from one side of the river to the other.
In comparison the cable car will be able to carry a few bicycles and a relatively small number of people many of whom would not be using it for a genuine transport purpose but simply for the novelty of riding it just as they would do at Alton Towers. There is nothing wrong with that but the money shouldn't come out of the transport budget.
I agree it would be better (and cheaper!) if car, bus and taxi drivers just behaved in a responsible way towards cyclists, but until that happens a network of bike-lanes is IMO very necessary.
Agreed bike lanes are a good idea, but the blue "Superhighways" are badly designed, poorly executed, and devalue (i.e make less visible in comparison) all the existing cycle routes.
It's not the first commercial enterprise to have appeared on an Underground map - others include "Oval", "Kew Gardens", "North Greeenwich for O2", "Custom House for ExCel", "Cutty Sark", the Queensbury and Northwood Hills estates, the Bank of England, the General Post Office (station since renamed), Covent Garden, the White City stadium, the Woolwich Arsenal, Heathrow Airport, London City Airport, all the main line railway termini)- even the original name for the Bakerloo Line station between Baker Street and Edgware Road - "Great Central" - all commercial enterprises.
Some were even renamed after such enterprises - Arsenal, Shepherds Bush Market, Kensington Olympia, Surrey Quays, Barbican
The difference is that these all have some geographical significance.
No use to me as I'm scared of heights - you'd have to render me unconscious to use it! I wonder if they will copy the Lantau Island Cable Car and have some of the cars with glass floors so you can look down as you cross?
http://www.np360.com.hk/html/eng/np360_exp/crystal_cabin.html
Will they use it to look at the O2? No.
Are there thousand of tourists standing on the east side of Canary Wharf looking at the O2? No.
Will they use it to look at the Thames floor barrier? No.
If tourists want to see the O2 or the TFB they go to those places.
~~~~~~~~~~
Out of curiosity, does anyone know what the operating hours of this waste of space/money will be? Will thousands pour out of the O2 at 11pm and head for the waste of space/money only to find it it doesn't operate past 9pm?
But why stop there - sponsors like things which are associated with their existing house colours, so what about:
The Coca Cola Central Line
The Northern Rock Line
the Tango-verground
My local station already appears to have succumbed to having a commercial name - the main entrance is now occupied by a commercial premises, so the station's name now appears to be "Costa"
Shortly after moving in, they had to close their entrance onto the concourse because too many people were following the natural "desire line" between the street and the barrier line, rather than going round by the new entrance.
As to the branding, the UK has sold just about everything in the last few years.
If you don't believe me, just look who owns the 100 biggest companies in the UK.
No, the cost of the scheme is not completely covered by this deal, but it is only for 10 years. Then a new deal will be struck and then cost will be covered. Just like the London Eye.
Your argument against shiny objects is silly, as if we would be better off without the London Eye, or Paris it's Eiffel Tower. So the Olympics is getting a shiny observation tower built by a world famous artist paid for by a billionaire, oh no the humanity. Let me pass you your smelling salts. The very idea of an observation tower at a public exhibition (cough)Wembley, Eiffel Tower(cough) is just an anathema.
As to the direct link between the excel centre and the Dome, it makes sense. as the number of hotels continue to grow around the exhibition centre, There will be more linked trips. Also people who are going to the exhibition centre will be encouraged to go to the Dome as part of their day out.
It also be one of few transport options across the river for bike users.
The area around the Exhibition centre is growing into a destination, there is the new Siemans centre under construction plus the proposed floating village of restaurants for the docks, the potential for more trips can only grow, meanwhile the Jubilee line grows ever more crushed I can see it proving the most popular route between the two destinations.
The difference is that the Eye was only ever a commercial enterprise, whereas tfl (and hence Londoners) is funding part of the cable car.
Barclays pays £5m a year to sponsor 6,000 bikes at 400 docking stations in central London, with several million journeys so far. Emirates pays £3.6m a year to sponsor two ends of a cable car in a relatively obscure area (and I live a mile from the Greenwich end).
Sounds like Barclays are better at negotiating than Boris.
Your comments will resonant with msany ofb the readers of London Reconnections. Whether this is a vanity project is subject to debate - what is certain is that this is first major transport project for which the Mayor can and should be held accountable. This is usually quite difficult because it takes so long to get transport projects in place the electoral mills have usually ground out the instigator of the plan. Boris opened the East London Line but it was Ken's plan - hence his being miffed at not being invited to the official opening. The problem with Boris is that there is precious little else in the pipeline, except the new bus for London.
This is not helped by his not answering probing but sensible questions put by London Assembly members but questions he wishes they had put.If he doesn't ever fess up to the odd mistake - how can we ever be sure he learns from them. Was it not Peter Cook who said, "I have learnt from all my mistakes - and can replicate them perfectly"? The good news is Dud's mate was joking. The bad news........
Anyone fancy travelling on the British Airways line between Cockfosters and Heathrow, or the HSBC line between Epping and West Ruislip?
Plus, there are commuters that will use it. The TFL building right next to Dome/O2, Pier Walk. Dead handy for them ...
Perhaps after the company that built them? You'd have had the Metropolitan Railway, the District Railway, the Central London Railway...
Not sure I follow either of the 'pro' arguments on this thread, particularly the 'it'll pay for itself after 2022' one. Why can't it pay for itself now? Why not just not build it and do something else with the money, like plan a new DLR line or build a new station? Why is it imperative to subsidise a commercial brand rather than create a genuinely new link somewhere?
These are important questions because they lead on to some quite worrying conclusions about the political priorities currently in effect around TfL, which seem not to take any account of the purpose of a transport system in a major city.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwyVWaCAD2A
TridentScan | Privacy Policy