|
|
| Re: Houston Dip (1349859) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Houston Dip |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Mon Apr 27 10:22:17 2015, in response to Re: Houston Dip, posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Apr 24 08:49:32 2015. I read those IRT books but always thought why only in a few stations? This explanation makes a lot of sense to me, but not because of any convenience to passengers. A cut and cover tunnel closer to the street means a cheaper tunnel. Keeping the stations close to the surface (i.e. matching the topography) kept construction costs down for the local tracks. Doing so for the express tracks would mean there would be grades for every hill on the surface. It cost more to dig deeper for a low grade line but then operating costs would be reduced (lower power consumption) with faster station to station runs probably also increasing capacity. You could also get away with using those lower HP (and lighter weight?) cars in high speed service. So the IRT's original explanation still sort of works, you just have to focus on the express not the local tracks. |
|
|
|