On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, Mr Thant wrote:
> On 26 Aug, 12:22, Tom Anderson wrote:
>> Cablecars tend to go *up* things. Are there any that are built in the
>> complete absence of a steep slope? By 'complete absence', i mean without a
>> slope anywhere along;
>
> The Roosevelt Island tramway might count:
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosevelt_Island_Tramway
>
> It goes from Manhattan across the East River to Roosevelt Island.
> Granted, the bit over the river is much higher than the two ground
> stations, but the overall journey is essentially horizontal.
I was in New York with a friend a while ago, and one morning, after having
spent the previous evening making an extensive survey of local beverage
outlets, he told me he'd noticed a cable-car. I told him in no uncertain
terms that he was mistaken, and to exercise greater restraint in his
consumption in future. About an hour later, i was rather surprised to walk
past it myself. I never mentioned it to him, and hopefully he still thinks
it's imaginary.
So why the bloody buggering hell did they build it? According to
wikipedia, it was built at a time when there was no road bridge to
Manhattan, only Queens, the previous tram bridge had fallen into
disrepair, and the subway was still under construction. What i don't
really understand was why building a cable-car was thought to be a better
option than repairing the tram tracks, or converting them into a road
bridge. Or even a footbridge, given that it's not far, and the cable-car
doesn't exactly go far anyway.
Cross-posted to nyc.transit, who will doubtless have opinions.
tom
--
First man to add a mixer get a shoeing! -- The Laird
