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 October 27th, 2006, 02:45 AM   #901
Songoten2554
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami Florida
Posts: 1,063
Likes (Received): 87

so tubeman

where do you work at and what train you take on wish we had some kind of mass transit in the united states we do but its not like europe and Asia
Songoten2554 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old October 27th, 2006, 02:45 AM   #902
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Songoten2554 View Post
tubeman

i want to know something what London Rail is the best and that you rode on?

and whats the Best and Worst Underground Train line?

also which london train you take to go to Work and back and such?

its just that i am going to london soon since i will begin to travel in a few years from now
Regarding suburban rail, Southwest Trains (Waterloo) is very impressive, a great new fleet of Siemens trains giving a comprehensive service covering all of South-west London (and beyond). C2C (Fenchurch Street) is also good, with again a new fleet of trains serving the Thames Estuary and Essex. Chiltern Trains (Marylebone) and Thames Trains (Paddington) are also good, but lose brownie points for being diesel-operated.

Other providers provide not so good services, namely the 'One' and 'First' franchises, I've seen some shockingly dilapidated commuter EMUs operating out of Liverpool Street and King's Cross and on the Thameslink (First Capital Connect). They're all relatively new trains, but very poorly maintained.

Underground...

Best Line: probably Central (recent upgraded, fully automatic)

Worst: Northern, without a doubt... Horrendous near-daily operating problems

My commute: Bus from Mount Pleasant to Holborn, Piccadilly Line from Holborn to Earl's Court

The Piccadilly Line, at least across central London, is very quick, frequent and efficient... It never gives me any problems. Its slows down a bit nearing the two crew relief points (Acton Town and Arnos Grove), but this doesn't affect me.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 02:47 AM   #903
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean Luc View Post
Will the DLR be the only public transport link between the two Stratford stations?
Nick answered this one... Essentially yes, but its not far to walk anyway
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 02:48 AM   #904
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Songoten2554 View Post
so tubeman

where do you work at and what train you take on wish we had some kind of mass transit in the united states we do but its not like europe and Asia

I work at Earl's Court, as a DMT (Duty Manager Trains) on the District Line. I manage Train drivers after having been one at the same location myself (and before that a driver and Guard on the Northern Line).
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 02:51 AM   #905
Songoten2554
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami Florida
Posts: 1,063
Likes (Received): 87

tubeman

about the DLR what do you like about it or don't like?

and is DLR feasible to be built here in Miami well we have the Metrorover which is like the DLR but its cool the it serves the area

well i haven't been to europe neither london so i am sorry about all this i am telling you
Songoten2554 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 02:55 AM   #906
Songoten2554
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Miami Florida
Posts: 1,063
Likes (Received): 87

tubeman

i like the julibee line but i hear about its new and such and also about Crossrail

what is the best place to view trains i hear its straford is that right
Songoten2554 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 02:48 PM   #907
Jean Luc
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 460
Likes (Received): 15

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
The WCML (West Coast main line: London Euston - Milton Keynes - branch to Birmingham - Branches to Liverpool & Manchester - Preston - Glasgow) and ECML (East Coast main line: London King's Cross - Peterborough - Doncaster - Branch to Leeds - York - Newcastle - Edinburgh) are both 25kv AC electrified and in places capable of near-Shinkansen / TGV speeds. I think with the right investment these two will serve us perfectly well; the WCML has just had an enormous upgrade and journey times from London to Glasgow (etc) have been slashed with tilting trains up to 140mph; there's little need for new dedicated tracks really... certainly not within the realms of financial possibility.
I think that few countries are better suited to high speed rail than the U.K., having a number of cities with populations in the millions separated by only a few hundred kilometres - the ideal distance for high speed train service. If France can do it (and presumably afford it) with its' main cities further apart, meaning a) longer travel times (so less advantage over flying), and b) longer lines (more costly), then why can't the U.K.? Are property acquisition and construction costs lower in France than in the U.K.? Less NIMBY-style opposition? Paris to Marseille is a good example of (a) - 3 hours via non-stop TGV, and (b) - 750 km via the LGV, above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman
All I forsee is upgrades / electrifications to existing trunk routes: The GWR route to Wales & The West should be a priority, as should the Midland Mainline. Through trains ex-CTRL are only really viable as far north as perhaps Leeds or Manchester; the distances between Scotland and Paris / Brussels are too far to make rail competitive with air, as shorthaul air travel is so cheap in Europe (Easyjet etc).
Why wasn't the main western line electrified decades ago, like the ECML and WCML were? Isn't it a busy major line like the latter two? Is any of it electrified at present e.g. within daily commuting distance of London? AFAIK there is less electrification in the U.K. than in other comparable European countries. If this is so, why?

Last edited by Jean Luc; October 27th, 2006 at 04:29 PM.
Jean Luc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 04:07 PM   #908
Jean Luc
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 460
Likes (Received): 15

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
As I already said, the CTRL is commendable and had to happen, as the current situation (Eurostars crawling across Southeast London on suburban lines) is an embarassment.
<snip, the following from separate post>
Eurostar is great, I travelled on it to Paris this time last year. Its still in transition somewhat as you crawl out of London waterloo on a torturous series of suburban lines,
Yeah, the Southeast London crawl does seem a bit below par, especially compared to the quick and easy run the Eurostars have out of Paris - on regular rail tracks. It's interesting to note that, in contrast to CTRL2, building high speed lines all the way into cities is actually rarely done in France. The only examples that I can think of are the Paris end of the LGV Atlantique, starting only 2-3 km out of Gare Montparnasse (using a once abandoned railway alignment) and the LGV Nord through Lille (where TGVs and Eurostars travel at much reduced speed). Usually the LGVs start on the outskirts, just beyond built-up areas. In light of this Tubeman, and the fact that you think that CTRL2 is a bit extravagant, would it have been possible to add extra tracks, dedicated to Eurostars, to existing railway lines in London, if only over certain sections, to give them a fast unimpeded run into and out of the city? Would it have been cheaper and allowed a similar travel time, compared to CTRL2? Could it have been done without too much disruption to existing train services and surrounding areas?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman
stop-starting to Fawkham Junction in kent, where you join phase 1 of the CTRL.
AFAIK the link line from CTRL1 to Fawkham Junction will be kept after CTRL2 starts operating. What purpose will it then serve?

Last edited by Jean Luc; October 27th, 2006 at 04:28 PM.
Jean Luc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 04:26 PM   #909
nick_-_taylor
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bishop's Stortford
Posts: 119
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean Luc View Post
I think that there are few countries better suited to high speed rail than the U.K., having a number of cities with populations in the millions separated by only a few hundred kilometres - the ideal distance for high speed train service. If France can do it (and presumably afford it) with its' main cities further apart, meaning a) longer travel times (so less advantage over flying), and b) longer lines (more costly), then why can't the U.K.? Are property acquisition and construction costs lower in France than in the U.K.? Less NIMBY-style opposition? Paris to Marseille is a good example of (a) 3 hours via non-stop TGV, and (b) 750 km via the LGV, above.


Why wasn't the main western line electrified decades ago, like the ECML and WCML were? Isn't it a busy major line like the latter two? Is any of it electrified at present e.g. within daily commuting distance of London? AFAIK there is less electrification in the U.K. than in other comparable European countries. If this is so, why?
Property acquisitions are the main stumbling block, hence the WCML fix by going for tilting Pendolinos - the track route practically stays the same (so no expensive house purchases). The average house in the UK is now around $400,000. Now that itself is a lot of money if you have to pay out insurance to ensure that nothing happens to that property, but you might have to slap a compulsory order to buy it and then demolish it. The result is that you could spend tens of $bns just ensuring you have an alignment before you've actually laid a single km of track, signalling or new trains.

My opinion is that maglev is the way - it is flexible enough to be built along alongside/above/below the WCML (busiest trunk line in the world outside Japan) yet still attain higher speeds than a HSR line which would need a completely new alignment. Britain simply doesn't have the vast space between say Paris and Marseille that France has, so we have to work around it or look to alternative solutions.

The Great Western Main Line while being a busy line (the Reading - London Paddington route is probably one of the most congested in the UK) really ought to have been electrified at least too Bristol - I suspect the reason it didn't was because of the Beeching Axe, where thousands of km and hundreds of stations were closed which saw passenger numbers drop, lower revenues and less money to upgrade the network at a time when most commuter and intercity lines around the world were just beginning to switch the electric running. However the section between London Paddington and the spur line off to London Heathrow Airport is electrified and the diesel trains that run along the entire route are pretty fast - not TGV fast, but fast considering the geography of the route.

The two below maps give an indication of the electrified lines in the UK and around London - unfortunately they do not show every station, or whether there are triple or more lines. Also the London Underground is not visible.



nick_-_taylor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 05:14 PM   #910
Bikkel
sadfox
 
Bikkel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Doggersbank
Posts: 5,048
Likes (Received): 1

Jean-Luc;
politics have a lot to do with France's prestigeous projects. Presidents reach immortality by building extravagant musea, huge bridges, libraries etc. The president in France holds a lot of power. Often protest and resistance are simply overruled.

The advantage of TGV tracks away from the cities is that fast city to city connections become a possibility, like direct connections from Brussels to Montpellier that skip Paris.
Bikkel no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2006, 01:49 PM   #911
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Songoten2554 View Post
tubeman

about the DLR what do you like about it or don't like?

and is DLR feasible to be built here in Miami well we have the Metrorover which is like the DLR but its cool the it serves the area

well i haven't been to europe neither london so i am sorry about all this i am telling you
The DLR's great, it certainly serves its purpose. I just wish they'd have had a bit more foresight when building it in the 1980's, as now millions are having to be spent lengthening the original platforms to accommodate 3 unit (6 car) trains. I like the way its ever-expanding, its like a huge plant ever-spreading across East London.

Kudos to Serco, they run an efficient railway profitably with enough money to burn for continuous expansion, of course their job is made easier as the line is generally built above ground on brownfield sites so its cheap to build.

My recollection of the Miami system is that its pretty similar to DLR; mainly elevated, it looked pretty sleek.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2006, 01:57 PM   #912
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Songoten2554 View Post
tubeman

i like the julibee line but i hear about its new and such and also about Crossrail

what is the best place to view trains i hear its straford is that right
If you want to see lots of mainline trains try somewhere like Clapham Junction, or for sheer variety Stratford would be a good bet.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2006, 02:21 PM   #913
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean Luc View Post
I think that few countries are better suited to high speed rail than the U.K., having a number of cities with populations in the millions separated by only a few hundred kilometres - the ideal distance for high speed train service. If France can do it (and presumably afford it) with its' main cities further apart, meaning a) longer travel times (so less advantage over flying), and b) longer lines (more costly), then why can't the U.K.? Are property acquisition and construction costs lower in France than in the U.K.? Less NIMBY-style opposition? Paris to Marseille is a good example of (a) - 3 hours via non-stop TGV, and (b) - 750 km via the LGV, above.


Why wasn't the main western line electrified decades ago, like the ECML and WCML were? Isn't it a busy major line like the latter two? Is any of it electrified at present e.g. within daily commuting distance of London? AFAIK there is less electrification in the U.K. than in other comparable European countries. If this is so, why?
I think the issue with France was partly that prior to TGV the railways were shocking, so I suppose there was more impetus. With the country being twice the size of the UK I also suppose that actual time savings on cross-country journies were far greater. I have no idea how long Paris to Marseille would have taken pre-TGV, but I suspect that TGV at least halved that time.

Our intercity trunk routes all operate a pretty decent speeds, the WCML up to 140mph / 225kmh and the ECML and GWR up to 125mph / 200kmh... constructing a new TGV-style route from scratch wouldn't actually save an awful lot in terms of time on a journey like London - Manchester, so from a cost-benefit point of view its a bit extravagant.

The GWR main line is electrified as far as Heathrow Airport Junction, the only two services using electric traction are The Heathrow Express and Heathrow Connect, the latter being a suburban service. All 6 approach tracks into Paddington are 25kv AC electrified though. I suppose the great distances involved with the GWR main line are a bit off-putting: Its not just one main line, its two in effect splitting just west of London (Reading) into the Swindon / Bristol / South Wales route and the line to the South-west. There must be easily 1000km of track to electrify if they electrified London to Penzance and Fishguard. Moreover there's just been a lot of investment in new diesel trains which will have a working life of at least another 20 years.

All excuses, mind. Of course the GWR mainline should be electrified along with the Midland mainline beyond Bedford. Why hasn't it happened? Underfunding under British Rail and subsequently whilst in the private sector. Other European countries seem to have consistently put more value on their railways.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2006, 02:26 PM   #914
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean Luc View Post
Yeah, the Southeast London crawl does seem a bit below par, especially compared to the quick and easy run the Eurostars have out of Paris - on regular rail tracks. It's interesting to note that, in contrast to CTRL2, building high speed lines all the way into cities is actually rarely done in France. The only examples that I can think of are the Paris end of the LGV Atlantique, starting only 2-3 km out of Gare Montparnasse (using a once abandoned railway alignment) and the LGV Nord through Lille (where TGVs and Eurostars travel at much reduced speed). Usually the LGVs start on the outskirts, just beyond built-up areas. In light of this Tubeman, and the fact that you think that CTRL2 is a bit extravagant, would it have been possible to add extra tracks, dedicated to Eurostars, to existing railway lines in London, if only over certain sections, to give them a fast unimpeded run into and out of the city? Would it have been cheaper and allowed a similar travel time, compared to CTRL2? Could it have been done without too much disruption to existing train services and surrounding areas?


AFAIK the link line from CTRL1 to Fawkham Junction will be kept after CTRL2 starts operating. What purpose will it then serve?
Regarding adding extra tracks alongside the existing Eurostar route, much of it is either on viaduct (e.g. Waterloo - Herne Hill) or in tunnel (e.g. Penge), so it would be hugely expensive / disruptive. The alignment isn't really straight enough to allow decent speeds either.

The link between the CTRL and Fawkham Junction may remain for freight, I don't think any passenger services will use it.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2006, 08:16 PM   #915
eusebius
BANNED
 
eusebius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Trumpton-upon-Ravon
Posts: 7,710
Likes (Received): 12

Hmm, pre-TGV France was still pretty good compared to Britain. The PLM was quick. This is not really off-topic but where I live you can see the difference between French and British designs in our parks. The old French, strategic, designs cut straight through the woods whilst British styled landscaping preserved the woods much better. It's France's system of routes, inherited from the Romans perhaps. The old N-ways in France serve as good examples of that. The N1 is almost like a straight line from Paris to Bruxelles. In England the A1 goes a little more zigzag to connect say Selby and Peterborough.
eusebius no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2006, 08:52 AM   #916
Jean Luc
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 460
Likes (Received): 15

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Kudos to Serco, they run an efficient railway profitably with enough money to burn for continuous expansion, of course their job is made easier as the line is generally built above ground on brownfield sites so its cheap to build.
Wow, you mean to say that the DLR is sufficiently lucrative to fund upgrades and expansion from profits alone i.e. without any funding from the government? That's a rarity in the world of railways. I thought that the government contributed towards the cost of building expensive additions like the tunnels under the Thames to Lewisham and Woolwich.
Jean Luc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2006, 10:23 AM   #917
Rational Plan
Registered User
 
Rational Plan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Slough
Posts: 3,672
Likes (Received): 678

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean Luc View Post
Wow, you mean to say that the DLR is sufficiently lucrative to fund upgrades and expansion from profits alone i.e. without any funding from the government? That's a rarity in the world of railways. I thought that the government contributed towards the cost of building expensive additions like the tunnels under the Thames to Lewisham and Woolwich.
I think it does not require any operating subsidy. The DLR has been able to build so quickly, compared to other UK systems is down to a variety of factors.

The 1st stage of the DLR was built for only £88 million. The docklands area at the time was landlocked inside London, with very poor connections to the surrounding transport network. The improvement of transport infrastructure has helped unlease a flood of development ever since. The pace of change has suprised planners ever since. This has meant that extensions and capacity increases were being planned before the 1st line opened.

The original vision of Docklands, as an area of small offices and industrial units combined some new low rise housing was swept away when Canary Wharf was proposed. The Jubilee line extension was built to serve this new level of development. Some wondered how badly the DLR's traffic figures would suffer as the Jubilee line served both Stratford and Central London much better than the DLR. But two things helped it grow ever larger.

Housing development recovered after the 1989 slump and as the 90's wore on it became ever more dense and frenetic. The DLR serves residential areas better than the Jubilee line, with its high number of stations close together.
The lewisham extension was built southwards under the river, connecting two important commuter rail stations. The connections drastically shortened commute times for people living in SE london and Kent.

The lewisham line was important for the DLR in two ways. Not only did it give an important new source of passengers, it dramatically improved its reputation with the Department of Transport. The project was built ahead of time, and slightly under budget. In comparsion the Jubilee line extension was a story of spiralling costs, and substandard signalling system was Kludged together to get the line open for the millenium. This severely damaged London transport reputation. I believe it was the principle reason the PPP was forced on the tube since the Treasury did not trust the tube to manage a big increase in funding itself.

Since then the DLR has taken the lessons of the Lewisham extensions to heart. All its projects have been for under £200 million (the reason why the London city airport extension and the tunnel extension project to Woolwich was split into two.) and they seem to have been able to keep to budegt and time ever since.

After the current batch of projects are built they only easy project they have left is an extension to Dageham. A new round of studies has been launched to expand the system further. But no announcements have been made. Probably because any further projects are more technically challenging and a lot more expensive, th ebest example of this is the rumoured extension from Bank into the West End.
Rational Plan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2006, 01:30 PM   #918
thainotts
Registered User
 
thainotts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Bangkok-Nottingham
Posts: 2,980
Likes (Received): 8

Tubeman, you say the WCML operates at 140mph, is the main reason for this speed the track (gauge, lbs/yd, etc) that allows the train to run at such speeds?
__________________
"สมบัติชาติ" ถ้าคนไทยบริหารแล้วห่วยลงๆ สู้ขายให้นายทุนฝรั่งมาบริหารยังจะดีกว่า เขาจะเอาออกนอกประเทศก็ไม่ได้ แถมการแข่งขันในตลาดเสรีก็ช่วยพัฒนา "สมบัติ" นั้นๆ อีกด้วย ....​ อย่าให้คนไทยกันเองดอง "สมบัติชาติ" จนมันเน่าเลยดีกว่า
thainotts no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2006, 09:01 PM   #919
DonQui
BANNED
 
DonQui's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Free City-State of New York
Posts: 6,035
Likes (Received): 10

Can you describe how the deep tunneled tubes were constructed? Specifically, what type of tunnel boring machines were around at that time, it has always fascinated me that technology in place nearly a century ago to build lines is still being usesd to construct everything from the Channel Tunnel to the current bonanza of expansions in Madrid.

If tunnel boring machines were in fact being employed in London during that time period, how similar/different (in general terms, as I don't know that much abotu them) are they to the current breed of mega-borers?

DonQui no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2006, 10:38 PM   #920
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQui View Post
Can you describe how the deep tunneled tubes were constructed? Specifically, what type of tunnel boring machines were around at that time, it has always fascinated me that technology in place nearly a century ago to build lines is still being usesd to construct everything from the Channel Tunnel to the current bonanza of expansions in Madrid.

If tunnel boring machines were in fact being employed in London during that time period, how similar/different (in general terms, as I don't know that much abotu them) are they to the current breed of mega-borers?

We have James Henry Greathead to thank, a South African engineer who moved to London and perfected the 'tunnelling shield' technique with the 'Greathead Shield'.

The first use of a tunnelling shield was on Marc Brunel's Thames Tunnel which today carries the East London Line under The Thames (although it was not built for this purpose). Below is a description of his technique:

"The mode in which this great excavation was accomplished was by means of a powerful apparatus termed a shield, consisting of twelve great frames, lying close to each other like as many volumes on the shelf of a book-case, and divided into three stages or stories, thus presenting 36 chambers of cells, each for one workman, and open to the rear, but closed in the front with moveable boards. The front was placed against the earth to be removed, and the workman, having removed one board, excavated the earth behind it to the depth directed, and placed the board against the new surface exposed. The board was then in advance of the cell, and was kept in its place by props; and having thus proceeded with all the boards, each cell was advanced by two screws, one at its head and the other at its foot, which, resting against the finished brickwork and turned, impelled it forward into the vacant space. The other set of divisions then advanced. As the miners worked at one end of the cell, so the bricklayers formed at the other the top, sides and bottom."



In short, at the site of excavation is an ever-advancing 'shield' which supports the newly-excavated tunnel, gives the tunnellers room to work, and allows brickwork to be constructed in its wake.

One of the two Thames Tunnel bores today:



This principle was developed by Greathead, who first experimented by building the 'Tower Subway' which crosses under the Thames just upstream of Tower Bridge. This differed from the Thames Tunnel in that it was circular in profile, as the 'Greathead Shield' used to construct it was an iron cylinder which protected the miners inside at the excavation face. It was advanced using hydraulic rams, and in its wake castiron cylinder segments were bolted into place as opposed to brickwork. This method was used for all of the Tube tunnels from that point onwards until the late 20th Century. The Tower Subway carried a single cable-hauled car carrying a mere 12 passengers, so understandably only lasted 3 months. This was all then removed and the tunnel given over to pedestrians, today the bore carries water mains and telecommunications cables under The Thames.

Inside the Tower Subway car... perhaps children were chosen for the engraving to make it look less packed?!



Although a failure as a railway, the subway was a success as a tunnelling technique, so Greathead then engineered the City & South London Railway from Stockwell to King William Street (now largely part of the Northern Line), opening a staggering 116 years ago and the first deep-level underground electric railway. Numerous more 'Tubes' followed, notably under Charles Tyson Yerkes in the 1900's.

The next, and really final, major development of this technique is the Tunnel Boring Machine, which works along the same principle but with a rotating cutting face instead of a team of miners. Like the earliest shields, they still advance slowly forwards with tunnel walls being built in its wake. Castiron rings have now been replaced by concrete, applied by spraying or 'shotcreting'. Personally I feel a lot safer in a castiron ring than a concrete pipe, but its probably irrational.
Tubeman 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 06:37 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