Crystal Palace solution
 

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Piccadilly Pilot wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004, John Rowland wrote:

Anyone wondering how Tramlink will bridge the vertical gap between
Crystal Palace station and Crystal Palace Parade, might be
interested
in the German solution... I think TfL should suggest this to the
safety bods just to get their reaction !

http://home.arcor.de/guenter.kretzsc...ack_carr_.html

That's genius.

Gets me thinking about other ways you could move trams, though.
Could
you fit one on a (specially-built) flatbed in a tube tunnel? How
about
a subsurface tunnel?

Been done, Kingsway Tram Subway

That's not what i meant - i meant loading a whole tram onto a flatbed
wagon, then sending that through a normal tube tunnel. Just like the
way
cars use the Channel Tunnel. You could use it to provide high-speed
single-seat journeys between different suburban tram networks (eg
Croydon Tramlink to Cross-River Transit via the Northern Line ...). A
backbone for
a tram internet, if you will.


What would be the point? Why not simply run it on its own wheels or build a
normal underground railway?

Crystal Palace solution
 

On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Piccadilly Pilot wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 5 Oct 2004, Piccadilly Pilot wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 4 Oct 2004, John Rowland wrote:

Anyone wondering how Tramlink will bridge the vertical gap between
Crystal Palace station and Crystal Palace Parade, might be
interested in the German solution... I think TfL should suggest
this to the safety bods just to get their reaction !

http://home.arcor.de/guenter.kretzsc...ack_carr_.html

That's genius.

Gets me thinking about other ways you could move trams, though.
Could you fit one on a (specially-built) flatbed in a tube tunnel?
How about a subsurface tunnel?

Been done, Kingsway Tram Subway

That's not what i meant - i meant loading a whole tram onto a flatbed
wagon, then sending that through a normal tube tunnel. Just like the
way cars use the Channel Tunnel. You could use it to provide
high-speed single-seat journeys between different suburban tram
networks (eg Croydon Tramlink to Cross-River Transit via the Northern
Line ...). A backbone for a tram internet, if you will.

What would be the point? Why not simply run it on its own wheels or
build a normal underground railway?

The point is that the tubes are already there, so you don't need to build
a new tunnel for the tram. Since tube trains are a bit big for on-street
running, bringing them up is a non-starter, so you have to send the trams
down. As for running on its own wheels - that could well be a better
solution; the only drawback is that trams are fairly slow, whereas a tube
train is fairly fast. You could always build faster trams, or attatch an
extra loco for the tube run, i suppose.

I have to confess that this is not an _entirely_ serious suggestion. But
then, i wouldn't have thought the tram-on-funicular was, either!

tom

--
Pizza: cheap, easy, and portable. Oh, wait, that's me. Never mind. -- Edda

Crystal Palace solution
 

--- Matt Ashbysaid:


Err, is this guy actually suggesting that we dig up every road
junction in London in an attempt to separate pedestrians,
cycles and motor vehicles?

Which would make it very hard for pedestrians to catch a bus, if the
pavement is totally segregated from the bus stop!

Crystal Palace solution
 

In article ,
John Rowland wrote:

Anyway, the Falkirk Wheel isn't real, it's just an elaborate hoax to trick
unwitting websurfers into thinking there's something worth visiting in
Falkirk. Haven't you noticed that every picture of it looks like it was
drawn by a CAD package?

I've wheely been round on it, John.

Nick
--
"And we will be restoring neurotypicality just as soon as we are sure
what is normal anyway. Thank you". -- not quite DNA