Right--and that's what I'm trying to get at wrt Boston: "if we were building the T now, we'd probably build it like Tokyo Metro, so let's take steps to make the T more like Tokyo Metro"
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?
-
Reboring would be as expensive, and they have lots of inconvenient curves (they follow roads, which also have inconvenient curves).
-
...and building new tunnels wouldn't involve a lot of expensive boring?
-
About the same cost, I'd have thought.
-
soooo why not stick with existing routes then
-
No particular reason to if you're spending the money on tunnel boring. And no need to close lines for rebuilding. Plus you can build longer platforms now, since it's not as important to follow streets.
-
Fair points, assuming that running a reboring machine through it is the only way to alter the cross-section of a tunnel (which it may well be--I don't know anything about the tech involved for that)
- 1 more reply
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.