3 ms·

Interesting article. I was surprised by how mature and automated the technology was, given how relatively few tunnelling operations of this scale have been atte

Interesting article. I was surprised by how mature and automated the technology was, given how relatively few tunnelling operations of this scale have been attempted. Also, the concrete slabs, and presumably therefore the tunnel, have a projected lifespan of 120 years [1]. I wonder what use the tunnels will be put to in 2120? [1] http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/Concrete-segments-produced-for-Crossrail http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/Concrete-seg...

JonnieCache 11y ago
>I wonder what use the tunnels will be put to in 2120? Being as the tube opened in 1863, I guess the same one :)
- andyjohnson0 11y ago
  If it turns out that we're still using underground trains in 100+ years time then that would be interesting in itself. Hyperloop [1] maybe? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperloop http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperloop
  - eterm 11y ago
    What good is hyperloop for cross-city travel? People in 1915 were I am sure imagining a future of personal flying machines which they were confident would be in operation by 2015. Here we are, still cramming into the same tubes that people were travelling in (albeit probably less crammed) over 150 years ago.
    - oxalo 11y ago
      Reminded me of a Peter Thiel quote reference in [0]: 'We wanted flying cars and instead we got 140 characters.' Flying cars were a means to an end; we got a similar end, we just found a different means. [0]: https://medium.com/@timrpeterson/140-characters-is-as-good-as-flying-cars-and-maybe-better-b14dcc7782c4 https://medium.com/@timrpeterson/140-characters-is-as-good-a...
  - easytiger 11y ago
    Hyperlopp is very very low density comapred to a tube network. It would destroy the capacity
  - rayiner 11y ago
    Would it? We've been using basically the same electric subway technology for more than 120 years already. We might have something different in another 100 years, or we might not. Note that if anything, the pace of progress in mechanical arts is slower now than it was in the late 19th century.
pjc50 11y ago
relatively few tunnelling operations of this scale have been attempted More than you think, I suspect; TBMs are a fairly mature technology. Crossrail is not as impressive as the Channel Tunnel, which is a major feat of alignment as it was tunneled from both directions to meet in the middle.
- andyjohnson0 11y ago
  "More than you think, I suspect" That is very likely. Wikipedia has a list of long tunnels [1]. And "Tunnel Talk" lists what the world's "mega TBMs" are up to [2] (frustratingly they quote tunnel diameters but not lengths). Seems like these machines are kept very busy, which makes sense given their cost. Edit: Even more tunnel-related stuff at http://tunnelbuilder.com/ http://tunnelbuilder.com/ [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest_tunnels_in_the_world http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest_tunnels_in_the_... [2] http://www.tunneltalk.com/Discussion-Forum-Mega-TBMs.php http://www.tunneltalk.com/Discussion-Forum-Mega-TBMs.php
  - darkr 11y ago
    > Seems like these machines are kept very busy, which makes sense given their cost. Interestingly, many TBMs are left underground forever, as it's often more expensive to disassemble and remove them then to just abandon them.
    - Animats 11y ago
      That's only done when you have a meet between two TBMs coming from opposite directions, and there's no way to get them out. Only for very long tunnels is that necessary. For most TBM jobs, you get the TBM back when it breaks though at the end of the job. After refurbishing, they're good for another job. Go to TunnelTalk.com for the best deals on used TBMs.[1] [1] http://www.tunneltalk.com/Equipment-Sales.php http://www.tunneltalk.com/Equipment-Sales.php
  - omh 11y ago
    Seems like these machines are kept very busy I believe that many of them are actually single-use. Some (or perhaps all?) of the Crossrail TBMs are being buried at the end of their tunnel. Apparently the effort of removing them isn't worth their resale value? That tunnel talk page does mention that several TBMs are being reused though so perhaps this is changing with newer/larger machines.

JonnieCache 11y ago

>I wonder what use the tunnels will be put to in 2120? Being as the tube opened in 1863, I guess the same one :)

andyjohnson0 11y ago
If it turns out that we're still using underground trains in 100+ years time then that would be interesting in itself. Hyperloop [1] maybe? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperloop http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperloop
- eterm 11y ago
  What good is hyperloop for cross-city travel? People in 1915 were I am sure imagining a future of personal flying machines which they were confident would be in operation by 2015. Here we are, still cramming into the same tubes that people were travelling in (albeit probably less crammed) over 150 years ago.
  - oxalo 11y ago
    Reminded me of a Peter Thiel quote reference in [0]: 'We wanted flying cars and instead we got 140 characters.' Flying cars were a means to an end; we got a similar end, we just found a different means. [0]: https://medium.com/@timrpeterson/140-characters-is-as-good-as-flying-cars-and-maybe-better-b14dcc7782c4 https://medium.com/@timrpeterson/140-characters-is-as-good-a...
- easytiger 11y ago
  Hyperlopp is very very low density comapred to a tube network. It would destroy the capacity
- rayiner 11y ago
  Would it? We've been using basically the same electric subway technology for more than 120 years already. We might have something different in another 100 years, or we might not. Note that if anything, the pace of progress in mechanical arts is slower now than it was in the late 19th century.

pjc50 11y ago

relatively few tunnelling operations of this scale have been attempted More than you think, I suspect; TBMs are a fairly mature technology. Crossrail is not as impressive as the Channel Tunnel, which is a major feat of alignment as it was tunneled from both directions to meet in the middle.

andyjohnson0 11y ago
"More than you think, I suspect" That is very likely. Wikipedia has a list of long tunnels [1]. And "Tunnel Talk" lists what the world's "mega TBMs" are up to [2] (frustratingly they quote tunnel diameters but not lengths). Seems like these machines are kept very busy, which makes sense given their cost. Edit: Even more tunnel-related stuff at http://tunnelbuilder.com/ http://tunnelbuilder.com/ [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest_tunnels_in_the_world http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest_tunnels_in_the_... [2] http://www.tunneltalk.com/Discussion-Forum-Mega-TBMs.php http://www.tunneltalk.com/Discussion-Forum-Mega-TBMs.php
- darkr 11y ago
  > Seems like these machines are kept very busy, which makes sense given their cost. Interestingly, many TBMs are left underground forever, as it's often more expensive to disassemble and remove them then to just abandon them.
  - Animats 11y ago
    That's only done when you have a meet between two TBMs coming from opposite directions, and there's no way to get them out. Only for very long tunnels is that necessary. For most TBM jobs, you get the TBM back when it breaks though at the end of the job. After refurbishing, they're good for another job. Go to TunnelTalk.com for the best deals on used TBMs.[1] [1] http://www.tunneltalk.com/Equipment-Sales.php http://www.tunneltalk.com/Equipment-Sales.php
- omh 11y ago
  Seems like these machines are kept very busy I believe that many of them are actually single-use. Some (or perhaps all?) of the Crossrail TBMs are being buried at the end of their tunnel. Apparently the effort of removing them isn't worth their resale value? That tunnel talk page does mention that several TBMs are being reused though so perhaps this is changing with newer/larger machines.