You get more seats per metre of train length, and a less draughty carriage, with fewer doors.
"If we were building the Tube now we'd probably build it like Crossrail" means there is a convergence in form between urban and suburban rail, but that this wasn't known at the time the former was built. Now that we DO know, we build the latter, & retrofit the former accordingly
-
-
I suspect it's too difficult to retrofit the Tube, and particularly the Paris Métro. Or the T for that matter.
-
Overnight? Of course. Over a long enough time span? Nonsense!
-
The only question is how long that time span would be. Gradual changes and incremental improvements + time = radical changes and dramatic improvements
-
I trust, of course, that you wouldn't advocate making NO effort to improve the Tube/T/etc?
-
Of course not. But things like platform extensions or tunnel reboring can be very difficult.
-
Right! So we either do them slowly, or we don't do them at all. I'm advocating the former.
-
Though there is an argument for leaving them as they are, with maintenance and limited improvement, and building loads of Crossrails to gradually replace them.
-
Seems like a lot of extra cost to maintain and improve existing tunnels while building tons of parallel tunnels to eventually replace them--so long as you're maintaining and improving, why not do so in the direction of making them more Crossrail-like?
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.