On 12/03/2019 18:00, bob wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:30:05 on Sun, 10
Mar 2019, John Williamson remarked:
On 10/03/2019 10:23, Robin9 wrote:
I remember The Economist magazine in the 1960s propagating
the idea that the North Line London through Islington and
Camden should be converted into an inner ring road. That
magazine had a real bee in its bonnet about converting rails
In the 1960's roads, especially motorways and dual carriageway trunk
roads were seen as the future of transport, replacing the old
fashioned, worn out and irrelevant railways.
The Economist were not by any means the only press organ promoting the
Indeed, the almost criminal lack of 40yrs hindsight was shared by many.
It was an echo of the earlier conversion of many canals into railways....
Were very many converted, rather than paralleled by, and pushed towards
Contour canals would be real pain to convert to a railways, as would
later 'straighter line' ones with flights of locks too steep for a
train, and of course most of the tunnels would be too small bore.
I went to a talk given by a Subterranea Brittanica guy once where he was
touting their then-new database of all railway and canal tunnels, and I
asked how they categorised tunnels that had been converted from canal to
railway use. He said the only example in the UK is Higham/Strood (Built as
a single tunnel but a mid-tunnel collapse resulted in two separate
Why was the tunnel built? Would a lock on either side not have been
cheaper? Is it because there is no stream available to feed what would
be a highpoint of the canal? Would not pumping water up from the Medway
still have been cheaper than digging a tunnel? Is any canal fed by pumping?
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
Spratleys Japs - Hands (Marc Riley session)