On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, Mr Thant wrote:

On 26 Aug, 12:22, Tom Anderson wrote:
Cablecars tend to go *up* things. Are there any that are built in the
complete absence of a steep slope? By 'complete absence', i mean without a
slope anywhere along;

The Roosevelt Island tramway might count:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosevelt_Island_Tramway

It goes from Manhattan across the East River to Roosevelt Island.
Granted, the bit over the river is much higher than the two ground
stations, but the overall journey is essentially horizontal.

I was in New York with a friend a while ago, and one morning, after having
spent the previous evening making an extensive survey of local beverage
outlets, he told me he'd noticed a cable-car. I told him in no uncertain
terms that he was mistaken, and to exercise greater restraint in his
consumption in future. About an hour later, i was rather surprised to walk
past it myself. I never mentioned it to him, and hopefully he still thinks
it's imaginary.

So why the bloody buggering hell did they build it? According to
wikipedia, it was built at a time when there was no road bridge to
Manhattan, only Queens, the previous tram bridge had fallen into
disrepair, and the subway was still under construction. What i don't
really understand was why building a cable-car was thought to be a better
option than repairing the tram tracks, or converting them into a road
bridge. Or even a footbridge, given that it's not far, and the cable-car
doesn't exactly go far anyway.

Cross-posted to nyc.transit, who will doubtless have opinions.

tom

--
First man to add a mixer get a shoeing! -- The Laird