On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 11:10:37 +0100, Michael Bell
wrote:

It seems to me that there is a great need for means to link
the dozens of pairs of stations in London and elsewhere where the
two stations are just too far apart to be considered "the same
place", and too far apart to walk conveniently between. The legacy of
the railway politics of the 19th century!
[snip]
Cableways certainly have very low visual impact, just two
wires, high up, and the masts necessary to support them. That can't
be very expensive. Certainly not as expensive as the Birmingham
airport shuttle at £10M for 1Km of double route, when the track bed
already existed.

So when I'm loaded up with luggage or shopping I'm supposed to hang from
a thread in order to move between two stations?

Oh and if you are scared of heights?

What if it is windy or wet or snowing? You too can get frozen to the
core, blown to the ground or soaked to the skin courtesy of a new form
of air travel.

Cableways can go up and down steep gradients, that's their
function in ski resorts. Pairs of stations often have a large height
difference between them. Speed is adequate for such short distances.

Do they? I don't recall there being a mountain range e.g. between
Shepherds Bush H&C and Shepherds Bush Central Line.

I'll tell you what - there are these fantastic inventions called
footpaths which allow people to walk along the ground on solid material.
If they are well maintained they are a pretty good and practical
alternative to dangling in the air.

I have always been struck by the fact that cable cars are
always hung well below the level of the cable. Why is that? Is it to
ensure that like pendulums, they swing slowly and don't make the
passengers sick? That will be a problem in cases where the route has
to go underground because the tunnel has to be so much bigger. But
could the difficulty be overcome?

Install a moving walkway.

Is this workable?

Not in the slightest.

ding next stupid idea please.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!