daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old May 19th, 2007, 04:24 AM   #501
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

A fantastic site for pictures of the tube, I was really impressed, the abadoned tunnels bit is quite creepy!

http://winstainforth10.foliosnap.com/
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 19th, 2007, 07:24 PM   #502
winstainforth
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: London
Posts: 40
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
A fantastic site for pictures of the tube, I was really impressed, the abadoned tunnels bit is quite creepy!

http://winstainforth10.foliosnap.com/
Thanks for the comment, anyone get the Insprector Sands injoke on a sign in one of the Westminster shots?
winstainforth no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2007, 12:58 AM   #503
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3271

Quote:
Originally Posted by winstainforth View Post
Thanks for the comment, anyone get the Insprector Sands injoke on a sign in one of the Westminster shots?
LOL I had to look really hard, but I eventually found it!

Great pics by the way
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2007, 05:27 AM   #504
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

Tube videos if anyone wants 'em. Not that anyone reads this anyway!

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=Alstom1995
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2007, 05:42 PM   #505
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

A great blog of this woman who decided to go to every single tube station! It's quite long! She talks about the architecture in the stations, in a laid-back funny way, and there are lots of photos of them too.

http://tubewhore.livejournal.com/379.html
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 25th, 2007, 12:29 PM   #506
city_thing
Put it in your mouth
 
city_thing's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Melbourne.
Posts: 7,128
Likes (Received): 883

Have any of you guys seen this video for the monometro that was proposed for London?

Gawd it's hideous.
__________________
Calling occupants of interplanetary craft...
city_thing no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 25th, 2007, 02:58 PM   #507
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

I'm not sure about it... It's a better solution than trams which just increase traffic, but they don't look particularly attractive, and putting them through Paddington is a no-no
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 25th, 2007, 07:42 PM   #508
sarflonlad
Registered User
 
sarflonlad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,086
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by city_thing View Post
Have any of you guys seen this video for the monometro that was proposed for London?

Gawd it's hideous.
this might compliment the urbanscape of a bustling bright Asian city or along the straight grid streets of American cities. But in the curved narrows streets of london they wouldn't pick up much speed and they'd look completely out of place in perhaps all but the docklands area.

There's a reason why people like to stick mass transit systems underground
sarflonlad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 25th, 2007, 08:17 PM   #509
Zim Flyer
Rock Lord
 
Zim Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Blackpool
Posts: 12,881
Likes (Received): 216

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
I'm not sure about it... It's a better solution than trams which just increase traffic, but they don't look particularly attractive, and putting them through Paddington is a no-no
Trams actually reduce traffic as they carry more passangers then buses so more people on a tram means more space available as there are less vehicles needed to carry them.
Zim Flyer no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 25th, 2007, 09:51 PM   #510
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zim Flyer View Post
Trams actually reduce traffic as they carry more passangers then buses so more people on a tram means more space available as there are less vehicles needed to carry them.
True, but unlike buses they can't drive around traffic. The Croydon Tramlink worked because many of it is away from traffic apart from the small section in the town. This simply won't happen in London.
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2007, 02:28 AM   #511
Martin S
Registered User
 
Martin S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,227
Likes (Received): 3154

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
True, but unlike buses they can't drive around traffic. The Croydon Tramlink worked because many of it is away from traffic apart from the small section in the town. This simply won't happen in London.
I doubt very much that buses can drive round traffic in central London. The point of a tram is that it uses less width of road than a bus because it is constrained by the rails and it can also be articulated without the traffic hazards of bendy buses and therefore carry far more people. However, to run a tram through traffic is wasteful. What is required is a dedicated route such as down a central or roadside reservation or on a completely different alignment.
__________________
Martin S no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2007, 08:02 PM   #512
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

A good source for tube photos:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephenk1977/sets/1617237/

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin S View Post
I doubt very much that buses can drive round traffic in central London. The point of a tram is that it uses less width of road than a bus because it is constrained by the rails and it can also be articulated without the traffic hazards of bendy buses and therefore carry far more people. However, to run a tram through traffic is wasteful. What is required is a dedicated route such as down a central or roadside reservation or on a completely different alignment.
How an earth can you expect a "completely different alignment" on central London's already narrow streets?
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2007, 09:26 PM   #513
Martin S
Registered User
 
Martin S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,227
Likes (Received): 3154

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
A good source for tube photos:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephenk1977/sets/1617237/



How an earth can you expect a "completely different alignment" on central London's already narrow streets?
You can if you are prepared to spend some money. There is an example already in existence - the Kingsway subway. I'm not suggesting that this could be brought back into use (part of it has been lost to a road underpass anyway) but the main point is that if you are going to have trams, you need to be able to allow them their own dedicated route and, in a place like London, going underground may be the only option.

That immediately begs the question - if you are going to put a tram route underground why not build a proper underground line? However, a tram scheme would be much cheaper as it would only need to go underground where there was no practical alternative such as a centre reservation or roadside reservation. Then there is the advantage that the cost can be spread out over a long time as the tram could run in traffic over part of its route while sections of underground were being constructed.

The tram is not a substitute for a train line but can give a rapid and high capacity service with closer stops than a train would allow. It is an intermediate step between a bus and a full tube line.
__________________
Martin S no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2007, 10:50 PM   #514
sarflonlad
Registered User
 
sarflonlad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,086
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin S View Post
You can if you are prepared to spend some money. There is an example already in existence - the Kingsway subway. I'm not suggesting that this could be brought back into use (part of it has been lost to a road underpass anyway) but the main point is that if you are going to have trams, you need to be able to allow them their own dedicated route and, in a place like London, going underground may be the only option.

That immediately begs the question - if you are going to put a tram route underground why not build a proper underground line? However, a tram scheme would be much cheaper as it would only need to go underground where there was no practical alternative such as a centre reservation or roadside reservation. Then there is the advantage that the cost can be spread out over a long time as the tram could run in traffic over part of its route while sections of underground were being constructed.

The tram is not a substitute for a train line but can give a rapid and high capacity service with closer stops than a train would allow. It is an intermediate step between a bus and a full tube line.
It's nice idea but surely ducking and diving beneath the streets would be a logistical nightmare to build and finance in London. Trams/Light rail seem to work well for inter-(sub)urban travel - but do we really need vast lines cutting across the capital? A tube line would work so much better.
sarflonlad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 30th, 2007, 12:28 AM   #515
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

Quote:
Originally Posted by sarflonlad View Post
It's nice idea but surely ducking and diving beneath the streets would be a logistical nightmare to build and finance in London. Trams/Light rail seem to work well for inter-(sub)urban travel - but do we really need vast lines cutting across the capital? A tube line would work so much better.
I agree, I don't understand why TfL are spending money on tram schemes when a tube would be better. This proposed "Crossrail 2" scheme should be a normal tube line IMO. For starters, it wouldn't be able to stop at Piccadilly Circus because of geometry issues with the larger tunnels. I also don't get why on earth it'll go down to Wimbledon, that's not even in Zone 6! Yet we have Crossrail going all the way to Reading and Slough which are way outside of London's borders. Why call something which is effectively a tube line a "Crossrail" line?
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 30th, 2007, 01:39 PM   #516
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Crossrail 2 has always been said to more tube-like. But the difference isn't that big. Crossrail 2 would possibly go all the way to Stansted Airport. On the Southern Side it is expected to go to Clapham Junction, where it could easily be linked to certain busy commuter rail lines, for example the line to Guildford.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 30th, 2007, 01:53 PM   #517
Dan1987
Registered User
 
Dan1987's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NW Surrey
Posts: 946
Likes (Received): 1

I know this isn't strictly related to the London Underground, but the DLR was supposed to get new stock this month, I haven't seen any press releases about it, is it delayed?
Dan1987 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2007, 09:28 PM   #518
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3271

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
I agree, I don't understand why TfL are spending money on tram schemes when a tube would be better. This proposed "Crossrail 2" scheme should be a normal tube line IMO. For starters, it wouldn't be able to stop at Piccadilly Circus because of geometry issues with the larger tunnels. I also don't get why on earth it'll go down to Wimbledon, that's not even in Zone 6! Yet we have Crossrail going all the way to Reading and Slough which are way outside of London's borders. Why call something which is effectively a tube line a "Crossrail" line?
Crossrail 2 will be heavy rail and will connect numerous potential NR routes... Its not very Tube-like at all. The logic of Crossrails is to take strain off Tube lines by reducing the number of passengers passing through termini onto the Tube, as mainline services will run right under the West End / City.

I have no doubt that if Crossrail 2 ever got built, services would fan out to Guildford, Woking, Basingstoke (etc) in the South-west and Stanstead, Cambridge, Hertford (etc) in the North-east. I think Wimbledon is merely where the southern tunnel portal is going to be, actual services will go much further.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2007, 10:07 PM   #519
sarflonlad
Registered User
 
sarflonlad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 1,086
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Crossrail 2 will be heavy rail and will connect numerous potential NR routes... Its not very Tube-like at all. The logic of Crossrails is to take strain off Tube lines by reducing the number of passengers passing through termini onto the Tube, as mainline services will run right under the West End / City.

I have no doubt that if Crossrail 2 ever got built, services would fan out to Guildford, Woking, Basingstoke (etc) in the South-west and Stanstead, Cambridge, Hertford (etc) in the North-east. I think Wimbledon is merely where the southern tunnel portal is going to be, actual services will go much further.
Absolutely! Crossrail 2 could take over substantial portions of the SWT network.

My understanding of the Wimbledon Portal is that a tunnel will begin at Raynes Park (coming off SWT lines?) and re-emerge at Wimbledon on to the District line.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but SWT trains can already go on to the Wimbledon side of the District line all the way to East Putney on to Clapham Junction (e.g. when there's engineering work on the NR line)- so why build a portal? Or is the suggestion that the main tunnel itself will begin in Wimbledon? I'm confused.
sarflonlad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2007, 05:50 AM   #520
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,954
Likes (Received): 18212

London Tube contractor mulls cost overrun solution

LONDON, June 5 (Reuters) - The company responsible for maintenance on most of the London Underground is likely to call for a third-party review to help resolve a dispute on cost overruns after banks reportedly cut off its funding.

Metronet, which handles upkeep and upgrades for nine of the 12 Tube lines, also said on Tuesday it is in talks with its banks about loan facilities after an arbiter found that its 8 billion pound ($16 billion) investment plan for the Underground would involve an additional 750 million pounds of costs.

Metronet is talking to London Underground officials about who bears responsibility for the cost overruns.

"It is increasingly likely that we may call an extraordinary review," a Metronet spokesman said.

A bank syndicate led by the European Investment Bank has blocked Metronet's access to further funding because of the higher costs, according to recent media reports.

Talks with the banks remain confidential, the Metronet spokesman said, declining to give more details.

"We have been in discussions with our banks and expect to be engaged on these issues for some months more," the spokesman said. "This is a long process, and it will take time to complete."

Metronet is owned by WS Atkins , Balfour Beatty , Bombardier Inc.'s rail equipment unit Bombardier Transportation, EDF Energy and Thames Water.

Last month, Moody's Investors Service cut to "junk" the ratings on Metronet's finance vehicles -- Metronet Rail BCV Finance and Metronet Rail SSL Finance -- saying both companies may face problems in cutting costs and overhauling the network within their available funding limits.

The units have just over 2 billion pounds of rated debt, of which 1.08 billion is insured and therefore has the highest rating.

The remaining 1.02 billion is in senior secured bank loans, which are rated Ba1 and on which the rating may fall further, Moody's said.

Metronet is responsible under a 30-year public-private partnership contract for the infrastructure of the Bakerloo, Central, Victoria, Waterloo & City Tube lines via Metronet BCV, and the Metropolitan, District, Circle, Hammersmith & City and East London sub-surface lines via Metronet SSL.

The 144-year old London underground handles about 3 million passengers daily, who often suffer delays and overcrowding despite paying some of the highest fares in the world.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
britain, emirates, london, underground

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium