Clive George wrote:
On 21/12/2011 11:37, Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
"Doctor Drivel" wrote:

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Tony Bryer wrote:

On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 00:54:09 -0000 Doctor Drivel wrote :
Most tram systems are a joke. Electric buses that costs an
absolute fortune.

Melbourne's tram system is progressively being extended. Trams last
a long time compared with modern buses - our A & B class trams have
been running since the mid 1980s - and can carry lots of people:
our newest five section trams can carry 240 people.

Trams are only feasible where roads are wide enough. Most roads in
UK cities are not wide enough.

This sort of thing was touted frequently by lefty press when I lived
near Cambridge - what about trams or overhead railway to cross the
city. Typical pie in the sky b/s that overlooked the narrow streets
and, in the case of overhead railway, what the residents might think
about having trains rumbling past ten feet from their front bedrooms.

Modern tunnelling is cheap - boring or cut & cover. Say two tunnels
right under Cambridge, that meet in a croass the centre with a big
underground station that maybe linking with the mainline station.

Oh, cut and cover under Cambridge! What a novel idea!

Reckon the scuba equipment will be provided by the tunnel owners?


Wot, like it is in the Chunnel?