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 13th, 2012, 04:09 AM   #4961
Highcliff
Fake democracy
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: São Paulo
Posts: 7,384
Likes (Received): 5011

tonkso
is it true the goverment thought in monorail for DLR? does the goverment think the light rail has more advantages than monorail?
Highcliff no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 13th, 2012, 11:34 AM   #4962
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

I guess the original elevated railways of London (i.e. the viaduct approaches to termini like London Bridge, Waterloo, Liverpool Street, Cannon Street, Fenchurch Street etc) are all tall enough so were future proof. The acid test is whether a double decker bus can fit through the arches really, and they are all tall enough for that I think.

Modern elevated railways in other countries that I have seen (e.g. the airport line in Bangkok, the system in Miami etc) do seem to favour higher viaducts, I'm not entirely sure of the rationale behind the height being what it is?
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 13th, 2012, 04:05 PM   #4963
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
I guess the original elevated railways of London (i.e. the viaduct approaches to termini like London Bridge, Waterloo, Liverpool Street, Cannon Street, Fenchurch Street etc) are all tall enough so were future proof. The acid test is whether a double decker bus can fit through the arches really, and they are all tall enough for that I think.
In most places - the ground level changes while the viaduct remains the same height, so there are some low clearances on those Victorian viaducts (though those arches might not be in use for roads).

Quite amazing foresight to give that much clearance, given the date. Then again ancient gates into cities were nearly there but need(ed) bespoke double-deck vehicles to get through those archways - but that was to make sure those defending the city had the drop over someone standing on a horse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ill tonkso View Post
Dollis Brook is the highest point on the Tube.
To clarify, that highest above ground level - Amersham station is the highest above sea level (though it's not much above ground level) - in other words that's our tallest viaduct.
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2012, 12:42 AM   #4964
Woonsocket54
PC LOAD LETTER
 
Woonsocket54's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: East Millinocket, Maine
Posts: 5,668
Likes (Received): 5791

DLR is not that ugly, though it does go through some of the ugliest parts of London.
Woonsocket54 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2012, 01:26 PM   #4965
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

Tubeman, yesterday, when travelling on the Piccadilly line, I saw this proto-branch between Rayners Lane and South Harrow (it's quite large - I'm surprised I've not seen it before), where a single track alignment curves off the main viaduct.

What was it there for?
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2012, 02:05 PM   #4966
lemmo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 299
Likes (Received): 60

South Harrow Gas Works? see p5 of Harsig's District diagram (PDF)

lemmo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2012, 03:38 PM   #4967
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

Thanks, that sounds right.
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th, 2012, 10:11 PM   #4968
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Yup, here it is in the 1930's

[IMG]http://i45.************/5f4q6f.jpg[/IMG]

...and the stub today... strangely modern-looking, definitely not 1910 vintage



The sidings were in use 1910 - 04/04/1954. Very unusual in that it was an industrial site accessed solely via LU (possibly unique even). There were a fair few goods / coal yards attached to stations (mostly on the Metropolitan Line and lines built by mainline companies before being transferred to LT like the High Barnet Branch and east end of the Central Line), but in terms of gasworks / factories I can't think of any others which were accessed by lines which have always been under LU (and its predecessors') ownership.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 1st, 2012, 10:23 PM   #4969
citybus
Registered User
 
citybus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Belfast
Posts: 1,756
Likes (Received): 230

Amazon says your new book is out in August. Is this true? They once said another book I wanted was coming out soon- they were about three years premature.
citybus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 2nd, 2012, 03:35 PM   #4970
CairnsTony
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Cairns, Qld.
Posts: 242
Likes (Received): 24

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Yup, here it is in the 1930's
Is there any particular reason they retained this little stub of viaduct? Do you know if it served any purpose or is it just an oddity of incomplete demolition?
CairnsTony no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2012, 12:18 PM   #4971
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by citybus View Post
Amazon says your new book is out in August. Is this true? They once said another book I wanted was coming out soon- they were about three years premature.
Yes, it's true

Hopefully while riding a wave of Olympics-fever, it'll be propelled to #1 best seller

Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 3rd, 2012, 12:22 PM   #4972
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by CairnsTony View Post
Is there any particular reason they retained this little stub of viaduct? Do you know if it served any purpose or is it just an oddity of incomplete demolition?
Just an oddity I suppose... there doesn't appear to be any businesses underneath it, which is the usual reason why abandoned railway viaducts might be retained.

Evidently the embankment the viaduct led to had all been levelled (see the old map), so it does seem odd that they didn't bother demolishing the viaduct while they were at it.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2012, 02:18 PM   #4973
Martin S
Registered User
 
Martin S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 10,235
Likes (Received): 3156

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Just an oddity I suppose... there doesn't appear to be any businesses underneath it, which is the usual reason why abandoned railway viaducts might be retained.

Evidently the embankment the viaduct led to had all been levelled (see the old map), so it does seem odd that they didn't bother demolishing the viaduct while they were at it.
Might have been that they wanted to retain the opportunity to build a new branch in the future, which would be a lot easier if the junction section was already in place due to the difficulty of carrying out heavy engineering work in close proximity to the live railway. I guess there will be a number of header tunnels on the system built for extensions that never came about.
Martin S no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2012, 02:36 PM   #4974
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Evidently the embankment the viaduct led to had all been levelled (see the old map), so it does seem odd that they didn't bother demolishing the viaduct while they were at it.
It didn't need to be demolished, so why bother?
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2012, 09:50 PM   #4975
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin S View Post
Might have been that they wanted to retain the opportunity to build a new branch in the future, which would be a lot easier if the junction section was already in place due to the difficulty of carrying out heavy engineering work in close proximity to the live railway. I guess there will be a number of header tunnels on the system built for extensions that never came about.
I can't see that applying to this stub, and it was only single track anyway

There are plenty of examples of future proof potential junctions, like South Kensington on the Picc and North Greenwich on the Jub, but I very much doubt that's why this was retained
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2012, 09:51 PM   #4976
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
It didn't need to be demolished, so why bother?
You could argue the same about the earthworks which it led to, which have evidently been completely levelled.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 4th, 2012, 10:51 PM   #4977
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

Those earthworks have been built on though - the stub ends right next to the building there.
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2012, 12:08 AM   #4978
ill tonkso
Portsmouths Finest, Maybe
 
ill tonkso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St. Neots
Posts: 16,444
Likes (Received): 2055

Theres a junction stub at North Greenwich? I noticed it was 3 platforms (with the associated junctions) but I always assumed that was for the Millenium Dome traffic and to cope with the extra traffic after gigs. Never noticed it at South Kensington either.
ill tonkso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2012, 12:12 AM   #4979
davidaiow
Registered User
 
davidaiow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London E14/Isle of Wight
Posts: 544
Likes (Received): 5

I'm I correct in thinking that I read somewhere this was because of the planned extension Eastwards?
davidaiow no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2012, 03:14 AM   #4980
Highcliff
Fake democracy
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: São Paulo
Posts: 7,384
Likes (Received): 5011

Tubeman, ill tonkso
Is there or was there any line not very successful in London in passengers per day?

Last edited by Highcliff; June 9th, 2012 at 03:22 AM.
Highcliff no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
london, railways, tube

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 08:36 AM.


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