|
Zephro posted:Like I said, if you ever get to sit in a carriage from the 60s or so you will find little headrests on the sides of the seats, so that both the person next to the window and the one next to the aisle can have somewhere to rest their heads and - presumably - sleep. Modern ones are presumably designed to cram the highest number of seats into the smallest amount of space and drat any discomfort that results. I miss the old A-stock Metropolitan Line trains that also ran on the old East London Line, with the 3+2 bench seats. Most comfortable train ever run on the Underground (allegedly because the high speeds and crappy track on the Metroland sections meant they had to have big bouncy seats to avoid breaking peoples spines). Anyway - making the ridiculously large assumption that we ever get a non-poo poo Government in, how tricky would renationalising the railways be? Can we, like with Metrolines and Railtrack, just let the whole thing fall apart and then pick up the pieces? Also, Bozza, did you ever do that big effortpost on signalling and ATO you threatened?
|
#
¿
May 8, 2012 22:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 21:18 |
|
|
Gat posted:I think the cost of widening any of the deep level tube lines would be just as, if not more, expensive than building a new line. There would be no point to extending any tube line at a bigger diameter "just in case" (though they did for the Jubilee line extension to put a walkway in). Yeah widening existing tunnels is just completely off the table. There's pretty much no way it can be done without effectively closing the line for years on end. Now digging extra tunnels under the existing ones, as they started to do before the war (they ended up using the tunnels as deep level shelters), is a different matter - the geology is well-understood, in most cases TfL will already own the rights to dig in those areas, and most of the expensive bits of the station infrastructure will already be there. I remember reading a book when I was a kid which must have been from the sixties or seventies (it talked about the "Fleet Line" before it was renamed the Jubilee Line) which talked about express services on the Northern and Central Lines (including a whole new direct route between Liverpool Street and Holborn to avoid the tortuous twists the line had to take), as well as a new Circle Line stopping only at the mainline termini - any idea what happened to those ideas? It strikes me taht a lot of the congestion on the Underground could be alleviated by separating traffic like that.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2012 12:25
|
|
|
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad posted:There's one in South London that goes from Clapham High Street to Olympia each afternoon, but never comes back. It's especially baffling because London Bridge - Willsden Junction would be a good route to add to the London Overground network. Actually on that - am I the only one to be really impressed with the Overground? I know in a lot of places it's effectively just a rebrand of a load of existing suburban services and is a bit of a lashup on the technical side, but it's a great example of how a unitary (and public) system can vastly increase the utility of a fragmented and underused system. Alas we'll probably never see similar things happen in, say, Birmingham or on the trans-Pennine routes, both of which could massively benefit from that sort of integration (with what is really pretty minimal investment).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2012 14:35
|
|
|
Munin posted:The idea was so there was a pool of "competing" rail companies. This "competition" would drive them to improve their service and drive down costs. Let's not forget John Major was an honest-to-god trainspotter in his youth, and genuinely believed that breaking them up in this way would rekindle the days of the Big 4, with them competing out of pride to be the fastest, cheapest and best. Mix that with his Tory conviction that the post-War nationalisation had ruined the railway system and it's pretty easy to see where this was going. To this day there's probably some sad bewildered part of his soul wondering why the ECML and GW franchises aren't competing to have the fastest train any more. Interesting question - given that one of the main reasons the Tories have given for continually allowing above-inflation train rises is that it would be "relieving the burden" on taxpayers of subsidising the railways, ignoring the large indirect (and sometimes direct) subsidies given to road and air transport, how much actual subsidy per passenger-mile do the train companies get on average? (Inevitable followup - how does that compare to other European nations with actual functioning railways?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2012 21:26
|
|
|
Moving a discussion about disabled accessibility on the Tube from the Olympics thread to here as the better place for it.Install Gentoo posted:It is my understanding that there's a lot of stations that only take one kind of train, don't have wheelchair accessible route to the surface, but also have the platform not flush with the trains in use. Since there's already 33 stations that are equipped with an accessible route to the surface, narrow enough gaps, but incorrect platform heights. Apart from Westminster and the (outside the centre) Northern Line stations I mentioned i can't think of any stations that have step-free access to the platforms but don't have a step-free access to the train. (In fact ISTR there's a very good reason why sub-surface stock trains *must* have a step up and out even on completely straight platforms but i really can't remember it, perhaps someone can enlighten me...) Getting step-free access (or even escalator access) to a number of stations would be basically impossible, too - Victoria, Monument, Liverpool Street and Edgware Road D&C lines, Oxford Circus and Holborn on the Central immediately come to mind as stations with very very small surface buildings unsuitable for escalator or lifts and no free space for new buildings without massive expense. Also, unfortunately, the stations that most need improvement of access (the big interchanges like Waterloo, Bank/Monument, Victoria, and King Cross/St. Pancras) are also the hardest ones to do, and pretty much also have to be the first ones to do. There's not much point in sorting out, say, Angel and Stockwell Park if those end up the only two stations people can travel between.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2012 01:47
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:They would be really really bad for the environment as well, those 8 ton batteries will need replacing all the time (the savings on fossil fuels will also prob be negative once you include the manufacturing costs of the battery). Electrification makes much more sense in the long term. These make a good stop-gap while electrification goes on - certainly better than the current plan of trains equipped with both diesels and pantographs/shoes for electrified lines.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2013 19:18
|
|
|
Endjinneer posted:Dual mode trains are probably going to get rolled out as part of the intercity express programme so that trains can, say, run to Edinburgh on electricity and then up to Inverness on diesel. What's the comparison of energy density once you actually factor in the weight of the diesel engines though? Those things are loving heavy... Also when you said Gyrobus, I was intensely disappointed it wasn't a roadgoing version of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyro_monorail
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2013 23:24
|
|
|
sweek0 posted:You've not properly experienced sardine trains until you've tried Berthnal Green westbound during the morning peak. I've done that myself on the Jubilee Line with Canary Wharf and Canning Town when heading into town. Also that Bethnal Green-Mile End stretch is the longest tunnel between stations on the Underground network. Do I win a golden anorak for knowing that?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2013 19:28
|
|
|
Jonnty posted:You always assume that it should be really easy for contractors to check for this stuff, but the amount of times you see utility companies digging huge trenches to find a single gas main makes you wonder whether the system's as good as it should be. Clearly, tunnels are more serious (especially in London) although I wouldn't be surprised if it's not actually the contractor who's to blame here but whoever's meant to deal with the records. Anything buried before (I think) 1995 or so just isn't recorded at all beyond say "Electrical cable in Acacia Avenue" and in London at least it could be recorded in any one of dozens of places - believe it or not one of John Major's only positive achievements was to standardise and centralise requirements for logging and reporting of underground infrastructure (as part of his general thing about reducing the amount of roadworks - it wasn't just a silly "cones hotline" after all) - it's also why you'll see multiple survey crews putting their strange sigils on the road and pavement before a drill is allowed anywhere near them. However the situation for stuff buried under private property is still pretty woeful, but you'd hope/expect the surveyors noticing an actual train tunnel at some point.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2013 15:50
|
|
|
kingturnip posted:So it looks like the Crossrail 2 consultation has started. North-east London is underserved by existing tube lines and has a lot of commuters into the centre of town. The south-west part is more about relieving pressure on services into Waterloo and Victoria than filling in a gap though. I'd have though it would have made more sense to go south-east and try to alleviate the ridiculous problems on trains into London Bridge, but that's been mooted for CR3 (or another expansion of the Overground onto freight lines heading towards Dover). Of course this is again something that was first planned in the sixties and would have cost ten times less to do then (even accounting for inflation) but I suppose you can't look a gift horse in the mouth.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 12:31
|
|
|
Gat posted:I think its renewing the overhead lines. I think at Stratford they're also messing about with the interchange between HS1 and the North London Line and the Great Eastern for freight services (although that work might have finished a while ago). They're also meant to be revamping the old Bow Junction, that runs down to meet up with the London-Tilbury-Southend line near Limehouse station, to allow trains to divert into Fenchurch Street (and LTS trains to Liverpool Street) when needed, but local residents are getting all NIMBY about even the one or two trains a day that currently run down it.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2013 15:09
|
|
|
Bobstar posted:I do love this account, but it does mean that I read things like "Delays due to a person under a train at Streatham" on the Southern feed and think "how is that funny?" Pretend it's a Tory?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
Brovine posted:Join the ranks of the portacabin dwellers! Well, Custom House is probably less walk from the gates at City than the Heathrow Tube station are from the Heathrow gates... Also I heard that they were draining the docks to inspect the roof of the tunnel which turns out to be in much worse shape than they expected, so there's another billion on the bill.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2013 20:09
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:Nah it carried actual passengers, found that one already (pretty cool idea, using the Underground for cargo). The Post Office Railway did carry passengers (unofficially and semi-illegally because the signalling wasn't up to the correct standard for passenger use I believe), lots of post office staff would use it to commute from Whitechapel Head Office out to the others as Whitechapel was the only one with spare parking. There was a long-standing conspiracy theory that it was to be used to evacuate the Government from London in the event of a nuclear attack because it went under a number of Government buildings and the Paddington terminus was adjacent to the GWR, which ran down to Corsham where the Continuation of Government Centre was (allegedly) located. (Similar theories exist for the District Line on the Underground, for the same reason, as well as the Piccadilly Line which has a ghost station (Down Street) and siding under what was once a major Ministry of War building and was used by Churchill as air raid shelter prior to the completion of the Cabinet War Rooms, and about most of the other central tube lines because all of them travel almost directly under two ore more sensitive sites)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2013 13:08
|
|
|
That's presumably the same line that's now part of the Clapham-Willesden leg of the Overground. Given how busy that link is now (as it's a great shortcut for anyone coming in to Waterloo to the west side of town) it's possible they kept it secret just so they didn't get overcrowded, especially in the days before the Jubilee Line Extension.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2013 14:32
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Is it TfL's intention that most/all London suburban services under the Overground banner? It would make sense, but I'm wondering how it'd work with their turn-up-and-go philosophy. So far they've mostly been opportunistic, taking over lines where the track and/or rolling stock were badly in need of replacement but the train company has been reluctant to do so. It probably is at the back of their mind that eventually they'll own most of the non-mainline track and stations in London (and possibly even London Bridge and Cannon Street) but it's probably not actually written down anywhere because of course they don't want to terrify the Government by being seen to have any long-term plans that don't involve handing over huge amounts of money to the private sector. I think even TfL have been surprised by how popular the Overground has been though, and I think you can apportion a lot of that to it being fully integrated with Oyster and, crucially, with the standard Underground map. Even though you can of course use Oyster on most rail services now, putting the Overground on the Tube map has removed a big psychological barrier; people who previously avoided suburban rail because of it's sometimes terrifyingly arcane pricing structure just treat it like any other Tube line now. As to the different ticketing regime and its workability - if the Met (and the Overground) can work out to Watford and the Central Line out to Epping, there's no particular reason the Overground can't work out to Sidcup, for example.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2013 17:21
|
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:How do you guys distinguish between the Overground and the overground railways in everyday speech? I find it a very annoying name. Most people refer to small-o overground trains as just "trains", whereas both Overground and Underground are just called the Tube. (Also am I the only one to get the Wombles theme stuck in their head when reading the word "Overground"? Weird that "Underground" doesn't trigger it, possibly due to longer exposure)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2013 00:26
|
|
|
sweek0 posted:The Japanese system isn't nicely integrated either. The paying per segment means that you actually have to touch out and back in with your Oyster-equivalent if you're changing between two tube lines run by different companies. That's only because London Buses were privatised in name (and where the profits go) only. Any franchise holder is required to run the exact routes and frequencies TfL tell them to and at the price they're told, in return for a pretty fat subsidy, and the improvements you're talking about only came about with the establishment of TfL and Ken Livingtsone's personal crusade to sort the buses out, even if it did have the unfortunate side-effect of introducing bendy buses. The privatisation has bought nothing to the table but considerably less efficiency in procurement and maintenance, and of course basically free money for Arriva, Stagecoach et. al.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2013 11:52
|
|
|
Noreaus posted:I don't get that graph. Why is the "Eco-Boat" the least fuel-efficient thing on there? Except why are the full 747 and electric car less fuel-efficient than the empty (well minimum crew presumably) equivalents? e: And what the living gently caress is a jet-ski doing all the way up at the top of that graph? They're about as fuel-efficient as a small motorbike (which they often share an engine with) and are pretty much one-person vehicles. e2: No, wait, your first assumption was right, more efficient is at the bottom. goddamnedtwisto fucked around with this message at 15:47 on Jul 3, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:I think the point is that the "Eco boat" was more a publicity stunt than everything else. Cruise liners are spectacularly inefficient in every possible way because any system that is not "make this thing move" lowers the efficiency, and almost everything on a cruise liner (from air conditioning to onboard surf machines) falls into the latter categort. I'm willing to bet that a liner with provisions like the between-wars transatlantic liners and modern engine technology would kick the arse of almost everything on that list.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2013 11:09
|
|
|
Venmoch posted:This isn't strictly true..... Actually British rail companies used to do this too. The most famous example of course is the Metropolitan Railway, which bought up swathes of land along its route and built entire towns (Nesaden, Wembley, Willesden) for the new commuters to live in. The Southern Railway used to own loads of hotels along the South Coast as well as pubs, clubs, and ferries, and the LNWR owned shitloads of coal and iron mines. They only abandoned them after nationalisation.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2013 08:24
|
|
|
Jonnty posted:They newest stock does: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_stock Those are for subsurface lines, which were (mostly) built for steam trains so there's loads of spare space on the carriages for the coolers and shitloads of ventilation in the tunnels. The Victoria and Jubilee Lines are tube lines which have way smaller trains and much less ventilation in the tunnels. The Jubilee Line Extension was sort of built with the idea of maybe being able to air condition the trains at a later date (the massive open-plan stations and platform-edge doors help manage the airflow) and there have been some interesting pilots on how to fit the coolers onto the trains themselves, but it's still years away at the moment. Mind you just getting proper cooling on the platforms will probably do the trick like 90% of the time.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2013 14:13
|
|
|
I like the Isle of Wight Railway - it has level crossings but they're all pedestrian-only, fully in keeping with its "like a proper railway, only less so" vibe. (Also there's something lovely about the idea of old Tube trains being sent out to play in the countryside when they retire)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2013 18:59
|
|
|
Brovine posted:Today, I got to experience the "STOP ALL TRAINS" button on the DLR. They do stop pretty rapidly. I used to go to school on the first batch of DLR rolling stock, which had inward-opening doors which - at the right speed and wind conditions - would believe they'd opened and slam the brakes on, almost inevitably right in the middle of the then-fastest section of track between Limehouse and Westferry. Lads from my school would try and position themselves up-train from attractive women so they could "help" them if it happened.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2013 22:14
|
|
|
coffeetable posted:The central problem in my eyes is that HS2 supposes more people should be working in London. £42bn of investment in the North would go a long way towards correcting the brain drain half the country suffers. Which would have a pretty big positive effect on London's transport systems too. I really don't see how it's actually to London's advantage if people have to move from Edinburgh or Liverpool or Manchester down to London to work, because you then end up in a situation where any possible extra revenue they bring is completely wiped out by the stupendous expense of things like Crossrail, which is only likely to make things worse in the long run. I'd not really realised just how bad the situation had got for commuters, until I recently had to get to Bloomsbury for an 11am meeting (which required being suited and booted so the bike was out, unfortunately) and the Central Line at Bank at 10 o'clock in the morning was like a vision of hell. I have no loving clue how people stick that day after day, there's no amount of money you could pay me to get onto one of those trains - and that's an hour after rush hour was supposed to have finished! (Mind you i did wonder how many people on that train, especially those cramming on at Bank, were actually going much further than I was - when I did used to commute by tube the CL trains were normally empty by Holborn, the majority o those people could have had a pleasant 20 minute stroll down to St Pauls rather than death by armpit - I knew it was only a half hour walk to where I was going so that's what i did. Harry Beck's map has seriously skewed a lot of people's perception of London's geography badly, I'm sure most non-natives would be astonished to find out how close together, say, Aldgate, Liverpool Street, Moorgate and Bank stations are. Maybe the solution to London's transport problems is just to return to the old geographic Tube maps...)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2013 23:48
|
|
|
Bozza posted:This is the correct answer. A 140/150mph alignment is easy to achieve with the components we use for 125mph railways, build the thing to GB+ or a larger continental loading gauge and you're away. This is off the shelf stuff that we already do in the UK so have the expertise to design and build to these sorts of speeds, requiring no massive development process and/or import of skills. Is there not something to be said for pushing the boundaries of what's doable? Surely that's to our long-term advantage even if it ends up being more expensive and less reliable in the short-term. That's how we got - well, just about everything good on the British railway network.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2013 11:51
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:It's best practices to have those anyway, because something's always gonna end up hosed on one track or the other at the worst possible time. The Jubilee Line Extension certainly is but I've no idea about the rest of the lines - I have a sneaking suspicion that quite a few aren't, based only on the apparent lack of signals at the "wrong" end of the platform at most stations.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
kingturnip posted:I woke up early and checked the trains - none running. Fine, TfL gives me a route to work that takes longer, but Greater Anglia have an update at 7am. No idea if this is the case here but often that sort of situation is caused by them discovering landslides or other track/equipment damage once the sun starts to come up that wasn't evident when they did the original check.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2013 08:53
|
|
|
Was anyone elses anorak inflamed by the ludicrous train inaccuracies in the latest episode of Sherlock, by the way? Worse than that loving Call of Duty game.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
Bozza posted:Yes, but I try not to think about it. Even ignoring the wrong rolling stock issue they always have (these basics you can usually ignore cos budgets etc), the glaring errors caused my brain to go into meltdown. It was more the fact that the mistakes were just ones that could be fixed in the script, not the shooting - why make a point of the train being a District Line one instead of just saying it's a Jubilee Line one, which also calls into Westminster and has loads of weird little side tunnels because of the JLX work, and would then match up with the CCTV footage (and the fact they'd have to shoot at Aldwych like everyone else). Then the last bit where they got into a tube train front door and walked into a subsurface carriage just broke my sperg-sense altogether. It's like all the mistakes they make with London geography, they seem to actually go out of the way to get things wrong, which in a show that's supposed to be about all the tiny details is just maddening.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
jammyozzy posted:This is the dumbest thing I've read today (so far), is there a good reason for that or are the various committees involved not talking to each other? They've just spent 5 years and a couple of hundred million extending the platforms for HS1, and there's no real way to connect HS2 to those platforms without causing much more damage to north London than extending Euston would (and shutting the whole station down for a few years), and building new platforms at St. Pancras is basically impossible.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 09:29
|
|
|
nozz posted:I think its pretty certain that at some point HS2 will connect to HS1, It just isn't being included in the initial construction. Once HS2 is finished it would be very hard to argue against connecting the two. Well the connection can be outside central London (I believe there are reserved routes at Barking for exactly that), because the advantage of connecting them is going HS2-Europe, and meandering through London is pointless for that. Metrication posted:If it went to massively underused Straford international, it would provide direct connection to the continent without all the demolition (assuming they put that link underground). Stratford's too small to be a terminus, although at least one justification for its existence is it can be used as a London stop on a future direct service from HS2 to the continent. There's a proposal for a direct Stratford-Europe service too (for travelers going to the City or Canary Wharf it would shave 20ish minutes off the journey). Speaking of which, does anyone know what happened to the direct London to not-France/not-Belgium service we were supposed to be getting? It seems ridiculous that we've spent all this money to just be able to go to Paris and the two dullest cities in Rurope. I mean if they could at least sync up the services so you don't have to kick your heels for an hour in Brussels before getting on another high-speed service to Holland or Germany that would be nice but oh yeah private sector efficiency.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 12:44
|
|
|
Cerv posted:the dutsche bahn direct train london to frankfurt via cologne and amsterdam via rotterdam (splits at brussels so make sure you're in the right seat) is still planned to launch in 2016. Oh okay - the last I'd heard was in early 2012 that it was definitely going to happen by Sports Day and then it didn't, so I assumed it had been shelved forever. Weren't Air France looking at replacing some of their flights with train journeys too? I know it'll never happen for all sorts of dumb (and non-dumb) reasons but I wish the EU would just step in and knock everyones heads together and say "Right this is how we're going to do rail now" so we could actually have a proper network and I could just jump a train from London to Rome or wherever. (Also can you split high speed trains? How does that work?)
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 10:56
|
|
|
Metrication posted:Trams are great because they are more segregated than buses, take more of a priority over road traffic, and can travel at faster speeds (often on abandoned heavy rail lines). There are occasional rumblings about using trolley buses with batteries to reduce the amount of wiring that needs to be put up (and address concerns about them ruining views) and allow detours, but obviously the extra weight reduces efficiency and there's all sorts of worries about the massive disruption of putting up the wires and also the up-front expense. They're basically not quite good enough to justify the cost (although if the EU keep slapping London around about air quality that might change the equation a bit). The other idea that sometimes rears it's head again is flywheel-powered buses with recharging being done at stops either through electrical pickups or through direct mechanical linkages. This neatly sidesteps a lot of problems with batteries (although they're heavier than comparable batteries they take up a lot less space) but the failure modes are... not fun and there are maintenance issues too.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
Cerv posted:New consultation open on Crossrail 2 - https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/crossrail/june-2014/ Well Overground has happened in the intervening time and I think they're going to be taking over the Lea Valley lines soon so Hackney and the area west of the Lea Valley are nowhere near as underserved by public transport as once they were, meaning Stoke Newington is now the big blank spot on the coverage map, so it makes sense.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2014 11:21
|
|
|
TinTower posted:I don't see why we should be spending billions on a rich man's toy when the money could be spent more wisely improving the already existing infrastructure. CR2's main job is to take pressure off that existing infrastructure, particularly the massive bottleneck at Clapham Junction-Waterloo and the attendant overcrowding on Underground lines that pass through Waterloo. Everything else is just window-dressing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
Jonnty posted:Unfortunate, I think - BR struggled the most when the politicians tried to meddle, and much as I'm convinced that private companies are damaging for today's network, it's rarely made better by the regular (and hugely inconsistent) political interventions that are so common these days. I don't think it was meddling so much as simple starving them of funds, something they don't really need any control to do.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
I guess the Old Kent Road route will finally use the long-reserved alignment at Bricklayers Arms, but hopefully not the reserved station premises at the actual roundabout (to make the southerly twin of Old Street station) because they've only just got rid of the murder-holes - erm, subways - there and I'd hate to see them restored.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2014 12:03
|
|
|
Metrication posted:Old Kent road is the clear TfL preference, I don't know why they even bother offering a choice as they usually offer some gimped alternative. See the 'automated metro' option for Crossrail 2. It's possible they're going to connect Camberwell up to the Overground - there's a long-standing back-burner plan for Overground to take over a chunk of lines into London Bridge and terminate them at "somewhere else". Linking up with Thameslink would be one way to do that (assuming they can expand capacity on the line and build new stations).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2014 12:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 21:18 |
|
|
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad posted:Though the Bakerloo line over-run tunnels at Elephant point off towards Camberwell, and they'd have to build even more complex trackwork to connect New Cross Gate to Lewisham (New Cross to Lewisham wouldn't involve anything though) so I'm not 100% sure they've thought this through, though NXG allows you to change from the Croydon trains easier so aaaaah decisions. Elephant and Castle-Bricklayers Arms-New Cross Gate lets you dig on a reserved alignment under and alongside the New and Old Kent Roads though, which minimises loving about with clearances and surveying. I'm guessing they're going to stick underground until at least Lewisham (if nothing else the hills around that area are pretty loving punishing for tubes) though so complexities of integrating with existing track mostly don't exist.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2014 12:59
|
|