> Apparently a 7-metre diameter tunnel will be built from Chiswick to
> Beckton... Why does it seem so easy to do this sort of thing, and so hard to
> dig a railway?
>
> http://www.lbhf.gov.uk/Directory/News_and_Media/Press_office/Press_re...

> On Aug 29, 2:48 am, "John Rowland"
> journeyflow.spamspam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>> Apparently a 7-metre diameter tunnel will be built from Chiswick to
>> Beckton... Why does it seem so easy to do this sort of thing, and so hard to
>> dig a railway?
>>
>> http://www.lbhf.gov.uk/Directory/News_and_Media/Press_office/Press_re...

>
> I'm guessing because Thames Water will be paying for this themselves
> via bank loans etc whereas crossrail is to be publicly funded and
> politicians get twitchy when any large amounts of money have to be
> spent even for badly needed transport links. Of course if its
> something utterly pointless but high profile in the world like the
> Olympics and they can bask in reflected glory and leave a legacy then
> its a blank cheque to Mr Coe & Co...

> Thames Water will presumably be paying for it, as opposed to merely
> borrowing for it, by persuading OFWAT to put up water rates, of course.

> Boltar wrote:

>> On Aug 29, 2:48 am, "John Rowland"
>> journeyflow.spamspam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>>> Apparently a 7-metre diameter tunnel will be built from Chiswick to
>>> Beckton... Why does it seem so easy to do this sort of thing, and
>>> so hard to dig a railway?
>>>
>>> http://www.lbhf.gov.uk/Directory/News_and_Media/Press_office/Press_re...

>>
>> I'm guessing because Thames Water will be paying for this themselves
>> via bank loans etc whereas crossrail is to be publicly funded and
>> politicians get twitchy when any large amounts of money have to be
>> spent even for badly needed transport links. Of course if its
>> something utterly pointless but high profile in the world like the
>> Olympics and they can bask in reflected glory and leave a legacy then
>> its a blank cheque to Mr Coe & Co. Sickening but thats politicians
>> for you.

>
> Or, more seriously, because there is only one tunnel and no huge ...

>Apparently a 7-metre diameter tunnel will be built from Chiswick to
>Beckton... Why does it seem so easy to do this sort of thing, and so hard to
>dig a railway?

> In message news.demon.co.uk>, at 02:48:12 on Fri,
> 29 Aug 2008, John Rowland journeyflow.spamspam.demon.co.uk>
> remarked:

>>Apparently a 7-metre diameter tunnel will be built from Chiswick to
>>Beckton... Why does it seem so easy to do this sort of thing, and so hard
>>to
>>dig a railway?

>
> A tunnel like that can have more up and down wiggles than a railway
> tunnel, and doesn't need stations either.
> --
> Roland Perry

> In message news.demon.co.uk>, at 02:48:12 on
> Fri, 29 Aug 2008, John Rowland
> journeyflow.spamspam.demon.co.uk> remarked:

>> Apparently a 7-metre diameter tunnel will be built from Chiswick to
>> Beckton... Why does it seem so easy to do this sort of thing, and so
>> hard to dig a railway?

>
> A tunnel like that can have more up and down wiggles than a railway
> tunnel, and doesn't need stations either.

>>>Apparently a 7-metre diameter tunnel will be built from Chiswick to
>>>Beckton... Why does it seem so easy to do this sort of thing, and so hard
>>>to
>>>dig a railway?

>>
>> A tunnel like that can have more up and down wiggles than a railway
>> tunnel, and doesn't need stations either.

>
>Effluent isn't my field so to speak, but Bazelgette's sewers were purely
>gravity run, I believe. Would these ones need wayside pumps?

> A tunnel like that can have more up and down wiggles than a railway
> tunnel, and doesn't need stations either.