4 ms·

And I am very thankful that the undergrounds in the cities where I spent most of my time were built much later: Tunnelling techniques evolved quickly during the

And I am very thankful that the undergrounds in the cities where I spent most of my time were built much later: Tunnelling techniques evolved quickly during the late 18th and early 19th century, allowing for much more ‘comfortable’ tunnel diameters – there is a reason the London Underground is called the tube, it’s difficult to stand in most of its trains.

therobotking 13y ago
This is complete nonsense. It's perfectly easy to stand up in the underground train cars.
- nemesisj 13y ago
  There are two sizes of tube trains - "deep tube" and "sub surface" trains. The deep tube trains are much smaller, and they are difficult to stand in if you're near the doors for anyone who's over 6 feet (I'm 6'4"). That said, it's not the end of the world, as you're only standing there when it's crowded, but it does happen. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground#Trains http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground#Trains
ColinWright 13y ago
How tall are you? I'm 5'11", or 1.80 m, and I have no trouble at all standing in trains on the London underground.
- claudius 13y ago
  Roughly 1.95m and while standing in the very middle is possible, it does feel more like an airplane rather than a train. Admittedly, I also like to have some space above my head and don’t always feel perfectly comfortable in tight spaces, so that might well contribute to a (perceived) lack of space.
justincormack 13y ago
Most of the early ones were "cut and cover" and quite big, rather than bored. And there is little difference in the sizes of the tunnelled ones.
archangel_one 13y ago
Nope - the newest lines (Victoria, Jubilee) are all smaller diameter trains. The larger, squarer cut+covers (District, Circle, Metropolitan etc) are generally older, because you can't cut a trench across London for a new Tube line any more. It's still not hard to stand on any of the trains as long as you're not right beside the door on a Tube (unless you're extremely unusually tall, but the odds are well against that).
quarterto 13y ago
> late 18th and early 19th century The first underground lines were in 1863. That's the mid 19th century. The first deep level train (what's actually the Tube) was the City & South London Railway, opened in 1890 (late 19th century). Check yo fax. > it’s difficult to stand in most of its trains Not unless you're like 6' 6" (and thus taller than 99.5% of males). http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/62018000/jpg/_62018161_015538933-1.jpg http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/62018000/jpg/_62018161...
- sokoloff 13y ago
  "Check yo fax" is not consistent with the standards of the HN community (nor with the overall high quality of the rest of your comment).
- claudius 13y ago
  > > late 18th and early 19th century > opened in 1890 (late 19th century). Check yo fax. HN, of all communities, should be familiar with off-by-one errors. My apologies for the confusion; you are right, I was referring to the late 19th and early 20th century.

therobotking 13y ago

This is complete nonsense. It's perfectly easy to stand up in the underground train cars.

nemesisj 13y ago
There are two sizes of tube trains - "deep tube" and "sub surface" trains. The deep tube trains are much smaller, and they are difficult to stand in if you're near the doors for anyone who's over 6 feet (I'm 6'4"). That said, it's not the end of the world, as you're only standing there when it's crowded, but it does happen. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground#Trains http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground#Trains

ColinWright 13y ago

How tall are you? I'm 5'11", or 1.80 m, and I have no trouble at all standing in trains on the London underground.

claudius 13y ago
Roughly 1.95m and while standing in the very middle is possible, it does feel more like an airplane rather than a train. Admittedly, I also like to have some space above my head and don’t always feel perfectly comfortable in tight spaces, so that might well contribute to a (perceived) lack of space.

justincormack 13y ago

Most of the early ones were "cut and cover" and quite big, rather than bored. And there is little difference in the sizes of the tunnelled ones.

archangel_one 13y ago

Nope - the newest lines (Victoria, Jubilee) are all smaller diameter trains. The larger, squarer cut+covers (District, Circle, Metropolitan etc) are generally older, because you can't cut a trench across London for a new Tube line any more. It's still not hard to stand on any of the trains as long as you're not right beside the door on a Tube (unless you're extremely unusually tall, but the odds are well against that).

quarterto 13y ago

> late 18th and early 19th century The first underground lines were in 1863. That's the mid 19th century. The first deep level train (what's actually the Tube) was the City & South London Railway, opened in 1890 (late 19th century). Check yo fax. > it’s difficult to stand in most of its trains Not unless you're like 6' 6" (and thus taller than 99.5% of males). http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/62018000/jpg/_62018161_015538933-1.jpg http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/62018000/jpg/_62018161...

sokoloff 13y ago
"Check yo fax" is not consistent with the standards of the HN community (nor with the overall high quality of the rest of your comment).
claudius 13y ago
> > late 18th and early 19th century > opened in 1890 (late 19th century). Check yo fax. HN, of all communities, should be familiar with off-by-one errors. My apologies for the confusion; you are right, I was referring to the late 19th and early 20th century.