http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/11/sil...mand-monorail/

wrote:
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/11/sil...mand-monorail/

I may be missing something, but doesn't Old Street already have a perfectly
good (fast and frequent) underground rail link to Kings Cross?

On 21.11.15 16:52, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/11/sil...mand-monorail/

I may be missing something, but doesn't Old Street already have a perfectly
good (fast and frequent) underground rail link to Kings Cross?


But it's not cool enough, mannnnn!

On 21/11/2015 17:09, wrote:
On 21.11.15 16:52, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/11/sil...mand-monorail/


I may be missing something, but doesn't Old Street already have a
perfectly
good (fast and frequent) underground rail link to Kings Cross?


But it's not cool enough, mannnnn!

Or is there an alternative route that needs transport?

If you were to go down Old Street from Old Street underground, along
Clerkenwell Road, then up Farringdon Road and Kings Cross Road you'd
actually in fill a few areas which are not well served by public
transport at the moment. Going eastbound back to Hoxton or Shoreditch
High Street would also be rather helpful too.

On 2015\11\21 16:52, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/11/sil...mand-monorail/

I may be missing something, but doesn't Old Street already have a perfectly
good (fast and frequent) underground rail link to Kings Cross?

It also has direct trains to Gordon Hill, Hadley Wood, High Barnet, Mill
Hill East and Edgware, so I'm not sure what northern suburbs they would
go to Kings Cross for.

On 21/11/2015 16:33, wrote:
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/11/sil...mand-monorail/


Ironic that gizmodo use an illustration of the doomed Moscow Monorail in
their article

PA

On 22.11.15 11:17, Peter Able wrote:
On 21/11/2015 16:33, wrote:
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/11/sil...mand-monorail/



Ironic that gizmodo use an illustration of the doomed Moscow Monorail in
their article

PA

I noticed that as well, especially considering that the Moscow City
Government is seriously considering dismantling a part of it.

Let's not forget about Sydney.

I'm sure that it has been discussed on a number of occasions, but I am
not clear why monorails don't enjoy the same amount of success as rail.

wrote:
On 22.11.15 11:17, Peter Able wrote:
On 21/11/2015 16:33, wrote:
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/11/sil...mand-monorail/



Ironic that gizmodo use an illustration of the doomed Moscow Monorail in
their article


I noticed that as well, especially considering that the Moscow City
Government is seriously considering dismantling a part of it.

Let's not forget about Sydney.

I'm sure that it has been discussed on a number of occasions, but I am
not clear why monorails don't enjoy the same amount of success as rail.

Talking of which, I see that the Wupperthal danglebahn is getting new
trains.

On 22.11.15 16:19, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 22.11.15 11:17, Peter Able wrote:
On 21/11/2015 16:33, wrote:
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2015/11/sil...mand-monorail/



Ironic that gizmodo use an illustration of the doomed Moscow Monorail in
their article


I noticed that as well, especially considering that the Moscow City
Government is seriously considering dismantling a part of it.

Let's not forget about Sydney.

I'm sure that it has been discussed on a number of occasions, but I am
not clear why monorails don't enjoy the same amount of success as rail.

Talking of which, I see that the Wupperthal danglebahn is getting new
trains.

I saw.

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/u...on-15-car.html

Those could not have been cheap, considering their unique design.

On 22/11/2015 15:49, wrote:

I'm sure that it has been discussed on a number of occasions, but I am
not clear why monorails don't enjoy the same amount of success as rail.

I'd guess the reason is that they are often built for prestige, rather
than rational reasons.

PA