Thread 16725881

Solution for traffic: shallow subways
>subway tunnes take decades to dig
>its expensive
Why not just dig a whole and cover the top? I got this idea from mondern mining

>>16725881 (OP)
There's a lot of infrastructure underneath roads (water/sewage, gas lines, etc.) that you're going to need to accommodate for above your subway system. Not to mention this drastically increases the risk of a cave in which is a lawsuit waiting to happen.
Also people would die.

>>16725881 (OP)
It is entirely possible to build subways like that, and portions of some subway systems were in fact built that way. The main downside of that method is that any location that has enough people to justify a subway system is going to have lots of expensive buildings and very busy roads along were you want the lines running.

>>16725881 (OP)
OP, that is called cut & cover, and has been used for building underground rail since the 1860s (the very first underground rail in the world, in London, used this method). As others mentioned, it has fallen out of favor due to all the stuff you have to move out of the way when digging in a modern city.

>>16725881 (OP)
it's a good idea I believe, there's drawbacks, you just can't do this in a city or mountain tunnel

>>16725881 (OP)
I wonder if the chinamen were smart enough to do this in advance when they started building those empty cities.

>>16725881 (OP)
>Anon doesn't understand modern city infrastructure
Where do you think all the sewage/water/gas/communictation/etc. lines are? They run right under the ground.
>just dig deeper
That's what the subway is to begin with.

>>16725881 (OP)
You should post this thread on /n/.

>>16725881 (OP)
This is dumb. Engineering is pretty rigorous. They don’t do this for a reason. New York is overbuilt. They just need to tear everything down and restart. Everything is too old there.