On Dec 3, 10:11*am, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 09:46:20 -0800 (PST), 1506





wrote:
On Dec 3, 9:27*am, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 09:21:05 -0800 (PST), 1506

wrote:
On Dec 3, 2:39*am, "David A Stocks" wrote:
"1506" wrote in message

...

Yes! *In this instance the cost of conversion of the Hammersmith
branch would be a very small part of the overall cost of Crossrail.

The 'cost' needs to include the disruption to current users of services on
the branch while the conversion is being done. This could be substantial.

IIRC, earlier in the thread I conceded that converting the Hammersmith
Branch to a Crossrail extension is perhaps not a good idea.

On the positive side this means that the branch will remain something
of a preserved example of early urban transit. *Between Westbourne
park and Goldhawk Road, the route is in essence an "Elevated". *There
are not too many examples of "Els" left anywhere in the world. *Only
Chicago has signifficant sections remaining.

Not to mention New York.

I didn't think there were too many left in NYC. *I can only recall one
short section in Manhattan. *Do the other Boroughs have many Els left?

Yes. The outer ends of most of the longer subways. The last one I used
was in the Bronx. *But you just have to drive off the freeways to see
how many there are. New York has major problems with electrolytic
corrosion on these that the London Underground's 4-rail system avoids.

And of course the extension to JFK is elevated.

If you want another modern example, how about BART? Outside the city
centres it is elevated apart from sections in the central median of
freeways.

Thank you. Yes, you are correct, there are more Els around than one
would think. I have utilized Bart. I guess Los Angeles' Green Line
would also qualify.

Adrian