London Banter - View Single Post

rail

In message
wrote:

On Thu, 7 May 2009 09:37:10 +0100
Paul Terry wrote:
If it was merely a bridge, it could be rebuilt. The difficulty is Ryde
tunnel, which is almost a quarter of a mile in length and prone to
flooding. That wasn't a great problem in the days of steam, but when the
system was electrified, the only way to avoid constant short circuiting
was to raise the base of the tunnel by about a foot, hence the very
restricted headroom.

You'd think by now they could just install some decent pumps. The
water seepage can't be much worse than what the tube experiences despite
the sea being nearby. Isn't it rumoured that most central london tube
stations would flood within a day if all the pumps were switched off?

The whole system was done very much on the cheap, if it hadn't been the line
would simply have been closed. When they can no longer acquire suitable
second hand stock there will have to be a major rethink.

Despite Polson's Petulant Whining rebuilding as a light railway with street
running to avoid the tunnel is an option that has been considered in the
past.

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail