Michael Bell wrote:
In message
ternal-september.org
Recliner wrote:

From ITV:
http://www.itv.com/news/2014-12-08/d...l-the-massive-
scale-of-londons-crossrail-tunnels/

They look rather biological, does their smoothness reduce air
resistance? Or will they be cluttered up with pipes and wires?

You can see some of those tunnels being lined in this video:
http://youtu.be/BGBGy8Jx9fs

On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 09:24:27 -0600
Recliner wrote:
Michael Bell wrote:
In message
ternal-september.org
Recliner wrote:

From ITV:
http://www.itv.com/news/2014-12-08/d...l-the-massive-
scale-of-londons-crossrail-tunnels/

They look rather biological, does their smoothness reduce air
resistance? Or will they be cluttered up with pipes and wires?

You can see some of those tunnels being lined in this video:
http://youtu.be/BGBGy8Jx9fs

Pity the trains won't be sized to match them. RER style double decker trains
would be perfect for this route. Given how many billions its cost for the
tunnels, I can't see why raising a few bridges on the pre-existing lines would
be such a big deal.

--
Spud

On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:26:40 +0000 (UTC),
d wrote:

On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 09:24:27 -0600
Recliner wrote:
Michael Bell wrote:
In message
ternal-september.org
Recliner wrote:

From ITV:
http://www.itv.com/news/2014-12-08/d...l-the-massive-
scale-of-londons-crossrail-tunnels/

They look rather biological, does their smoothness reduce air
resistance? Or will they be cluttered up with pipes and wires?

You can see some of those tunnels being lined in this video:
http://youtu.be/BGBGy8Jx9fs

Pity the trains won't be sized to match them. RER style double decker trains
would be perfect for this route. Given how many billions its cost for the
tunnels, I can't see why raising a few bridges on the pre-existing lines would
be such a big deal.

Perhaps it's planning for the future?

wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 09:24:27 -0600
Recliner wrote:
Michael Bell wrote:
In message
ternal-september.org
Recliner wrote:

From ITV:
http://www.itv.com/news/2014-12-08/d...l-the-massive-
scale-of-londons-crossrail-tunnels/

They look rather biological, does their smoothness reduce air
resistance? Or will they be cluttered up with pipes and wires?

You can see some of those tunnels being lined in this video:
http://youtu.be/BGBGy8Jx9fs

Pity the trains won't be sized to match them. RER style double decker trains
would be perfect for this route. Given how many billions its cost for the
tunnels, I can't see why raising a few bridges on the pre-existing lines would
be such a big deal.

Those handmade sprayed concrete tunnels are in a station. The running
tunnels are smaller, suitable for normal UK mainline stock.

Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:26:40 +0000 (UTC),
d wrote:

On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 09:24:27 -0600
Recliner wrote:
Michael Bell wrote:
In message
ternal-september.org
Recliner wrote:

From ITV:
http://www.itv.com/news/2014-12-08/d...l-the-massive-
scale-of-londons-crossrail-tunnels/

They look rather biological, does their smoothness reduce air
resistance? Or will they be cluttered up with pipes and wires?

You can see some of those tunnels being lined in this video:
http://youtu.be/BGBGy8Jx9fs

Pity the trains won't be sized to match them. RER style double decker trains
would be perfect for this route. Given how many billions its cost for the
tunnels, I can't see why raising a few bridges on the pre-existing lines would
be such a big deal.

Perhaps it's planning for the future?

The running tunnels are sized for normal UK-gauge trains. Obviously the
station tunnels are larger.

On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:55:26 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Pity the trains won't be sized to match them. RER style double decker
trains
would be perfect for this route. Given how many billions its cost for the
tunnels, I can't see why raising a few bridges on the pre-existing lines
would
be such a big deal.

Perhaps it's planning for the future?

The running tunnels are sized for normal UK-gauge trains. Obviously the
station tunnels are larger.

From the cross sections I've seen the running tunnels are considerably
larger than normal UK tunnels.

--
Spud

wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:55:26 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Pity the trains won't be sized to match them. RER style double decker
trains
would be perfect for this route. Given how many billions its cost for the
tunnels, I can't see why raising a few bridges on the pre-existing lines
would
be such a big deal.

Perhaps it's planning for the future?

The running tunnels are sized for normal UK-gauge trains. Obviously the
station tunnels are larger.

From the cross sections I've seen the running tunnels are considerably
larger than normal UK tunnels.

Perhaps to allow for a walkway, as with other modern tunnels? I don't
think they're large enough for UIC gauge.

On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:26:00 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:55:26 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Pity the trains won't be sized to match them. RER style double decker
trains
would be perfect for this route. Given how many billions its cost for the
tunnels, I can't see why raising a few bridges on the pre-existing lines
would
be such a big deal.

Perhaps it's planning for the future?

The running tunnels are sized for normal UK-gauge trains. Obviously the
station tunnels are larger.

From the cross sections I've seen the running tunnels are considerably
larger than normal UK tunnels.

Perhaps to allow for a walkway, as with other modern tunnels? I don't
think they're large enough for UIC gauge.

Probably moot anyway since the usual lack of foresight means the trains are
going to be the standard tiny UK gauge with the corresponding overcrowding.
Still, at least looking at pictures of the trains someone had enough sense
to specify 3 sets of doors per carraige, unlike the dorks who specified
the 378s on the Overground.

--
Spud

On 19/12/2014 09:10, d wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 21:26:00 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2014 16:55:26 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Pity the trains won't be sized to match them. RER style double decker
trains
would be perfect for this route. Given how many billions its cost for the
tunnels, I can't see why raising a few bridges on the pre-existing lines
would
be such a big deal.

Perhaps it's planning for the future?

The running tunnels are sized for normal UK-gauge trains. Obviously the
station tunnels are larger.

From the cross sections I've seen the running tunnels are considerably
larger than normal UK tunnels.

Perhaps to allow for a walkway, as with other modern tunnels? I don't
think they're large enough for UIC gauge.

Probably moot anyway since the usual lack of foresight means the trains are
going to be the standard tiny UK gauge

UK gauge is identical to most of the continent.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On Fri, 19 Dec 2014 11:12:02 +0000
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 19/12/2014 09:10, d wrote:
Probably moot anyway since the usual lack of foresight means the trains are
going to be the standard tiny UK gauge

UK gauge is identical to most of the continent.

Loading gauge, not track gauge you numpty.

--
Spud