What Couldn't Be Built Today?

[SteveP29]

Edinburgh trams!!!!

That couldn't be built today and everyone involved in it is trying their damnedest to prove it!!

Burntisland station for a station built on a curve would be my example

For a viaduct, try Chester le Street or the one through the woods at Plawsworth

 

[Trog]

I think you'll find that even then they were going for the "cheapest possible" design and didn't really care what it looked like.

The large number of added visual details with no structural function on the older bridges suggests that is not so.

The hundreds of small bridges designed for a 30 ton locomotive traveling at 40MPH. That are still OK 150 years later for 125MPH passenger stock and 100 ton GLW wagons, also suggests a certain lack of corner cutting.

 

[mallard]

The large number of added visual details with no structural function on the older bridges suggests that is not so.

Sure, they wanted to call attention to the engineering achievements, but they hardly went out of their way to make them look good. Using patterned bricks or adding an inscription is rather minor in the grand scheme of things. Even then, in many cases any aesthetic embellishments were concessions to the landowner; in the beginnings of modern NIMBYism.

The hundreds of small bridges designed for a 30 ton locomotive traveling at 40MPH. That are still OK 150 years later for 125MPH passenger stock and 100 ton GLW wagons, also suggests a certain lack of corner cutting.

Largely because materials engineering was far less advanced back then. They built them overly strong because the couldn't guarantee the quality of the materials used and the long-term behaviour of the materials was far less understood than it is now. Engineering was less precise, so they erred on the side of caution. Besides, a great many bridges and other structures have required repair, modification and even complete replacement to carry the modern railway.

 

[dickdarlington]

I doubt you'd get a route between Liverpool and Manchester, or over Rannoch Moor, where the track bed is essentially floating above a bog.

And the Settle - Carlisle wouldn't exist. Due to health and or safety. In fact, you can say that of almost most of our railways.

You certainly couldn't build new city centre stations with the grand designs as they exist. They'd all have to be on the outskirts. But then this was generally the case 180 years ago anyway.

 

[Crossover]

First thing I thought when I saw this thread was essentially generalising this

And the Settle - Carlisle wouldn't exist. Due to health and or safety. In fact, you can say that of almost most of our railways.

Especially the bold bit.

I recall watching one of James May's programmes and looking at imagine if we didn't have cars now, would H&S ever allow it, riding along at up to (theoretically) 70mph in tin tubes with the potential for serious injuries or worse should two (or more) meet.

I guess you could say similar about the railways, especially with the speeds they travel at. Yes, it is a fairly safe way to travel but imagine if it were proposed now - it would give H&S palpitations imagining how badly it could go wrong!
Likewise with Underground travel - London wouldn't be what it is now without it (however much it is loathed) but to propose something now, again, wouldn't get past the planning stages.

That said, I think it may partly come down to modern working conditions as well and back in the 19th century when railways and underground systems started appearing, potentially losing ones life was a risk of the job and it happened so of course things have improved for the better. On the flip side again though, if we were just starting from scratch, look how long it would take just to do a single line, let alone the entire country. For one reason or another, everything nowadays takes so much longer (including years and years of planning/surveying)

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Would the authorities allow ferries for that matter if they took that attitude?

Think about it; if you proposed to start a transportation system carrying up to 2000 passengers at a time along with dangerous goods, often in rough conditions and poor visibility, through a highly corrosive medium ( dihydrogen oxide ) on a vehicle which reacts very slowly to commands to change course or direction with only the top few crew fully trained; the majority of the rest receiving only the minimum of training necessary to carry out their individual prime tasks and not even being required to speak good English; that this system would then operate at high frequency and crossing a similar such system on the level at right angles would anyone in authority have the ability to translate that into plain English let alone have the guts to say "OK, go ahead!"?

 

[Trog]

Think about platforms, where else are you allowed to build an unfenced 3' drop some where that crowds of people are expected to gather. Then allow unguarded machinery to run past at upto 125MPH.

 

[boing_uk]

But there is that yellow line which makes everything safe again.

 

[Nym]

There isn't a yellow line at Bolton, so what happens when that pendo + 57 comes through?

 

[Jonny]

Edinburgh trams!!!!

That couldn't be built today and everyone involved in it is trying their damnedest to prove it!!

Burntisland station for a station built on a curve would be my example

For a viaduct, try Chester le Street or the one through the woods at Plawsworth

In the case of Chester-le-Street, am I right in thinking that the speed limit across is 110mph and there is a neutral section as well - right next to a station. Oh, and how come there's so much salt on the brickwork of Chester-le-Street viaduct?

 

[dggar]

John Ruskin was most voacl against the building of the Midland main line through the Peak District, especially Monsal Head viaduct; "a vale ruined, so that every fool in Buxton can be in Bakewell in twenty minutes, and very fool in Bakewell in Buxton".

Today Monsal Head viaduct is a noted as a beautiful structure that enhances the magnificent natural surroundings. It would look even better if it still had trains running over it!

BTW, doesn't that slating by Ruskin echo the short-sighted nay-saying of HS2 by the Chiltern nimbys... "ruining the countryside to save a few minutes travel time between London and Birmingham"? Like Ruskin, they don't see (or choose not to see) the bigger picture.

The group responsible for the cycle track on the Monsal Trail have published these plans to extend through the Haddon estate to Rowsley

http://www.peakcyclelinks.org.uk/section11.html

 

[Harlesden]

Talking of yellow lines, at Highbury & Islington, LU and FCC share a northbound island platform and a southbound island platform. Only the LU platforms have a yellow line, although the "stand behind the yellow line" announcements are heard clearly on the line-less FCC platforms.

 

[The Informer]

The large number of added visual details with no structural function on the older bridges suggests that is not so.

The hundreds of small bridges designed for a 30 ton locomotive traveling at 40MPH. That are still OK 150 years later for 125MPH passenger stock and 100 ton GLW wagons, also suggests a certain lack of corner cutting.

Its all to do with axle weight not the total weight. I think the max axle load is 25 ton.

 

[newbie babs]

Imagine the Settle- Carlisle not ever having been built (shameful).

Imagine if they built them today how long they would survive...not as long as the viaducts have