'Skycycle' - Proposed £220m cycle lanes above the railways of London

[gridban]

I voted "not crap" - I don't know how realistic it is but at least it's imaginative.

 

[Maurice Picarda]

I voted "not crap" - I don't know how realistic it is but at least it's imaginative.

Would you support the Greater London Teleportation Hub Scheme in the same spirit?

 

[gridban]

Would you support the Greater London Teleportation Hub Scheme in the same spirit?

If teleportation was possible I probably would.

 

[RedDragon]

£220 million seems an absurdly low price for such a grand project...

I'm sure I read that was the estimated cost for the first four miles from east end to Liverpool street.

 

[Tankus]

That makes an already impractical and expensive project into a major engineering and complex folly. You are suggesting a roofed in enclosure suspended above the existing railways.

Maybe not in full then, just extend the south facing supports , a single strip of solar panels intermittently where junctions are ,or at crossings to power street lights. And in places where the wind gets funneled to act as a wind break.

Much better idea than the dome , far more useful , improves and saves lives ....Even a potential revenue source from tourists

Just build one to see what happens , preferably from the south.

 

[ferrelhadley]

A simple overpass like this costs about C$2.5

So for something complex like Old Street or Elephant and Castle you could have the an overhead junction for cyclists and pedestraians for around £10 million or less. Or take Londons 20 most dangerous intersections and make them safer (and possibly quicker) for cyclists and pedestrians to navigate.

 

[Yelkcub]

I'm sure I read that was the estimated cost for the first four miles from east end to Liverpool street.

And still low for that

 

[Crispy]

I can't believe Network Rail would permit it, no matter what the cost.

 

[SikhWarrioR]

I can't believe Network Rail would permit it, no matter what the cost.

Its another of boris johnson's pie in the sky ideas like boris island airport in the Thames estuary in an area full of birds and a sunken WW2 ship with several thousand tons of unexploded ordinance still on board plus rising sea levels

 

[davesgcr]

Roofing over the railway might have some "operational" advantages - but building the damn thing would need massive engineering possessions (therefore causing huge disruption to the 50,000 or so each morning and evening that go into Liverpool St - let alone the hordes when Crossrail is there)

Money better spent if we had it) - elsewhere....IMHO. Like more carriages / capacity etc.

In passing , what is it about Stratford - Liverpool St , the late Prof Sherman (Maggie's mate) had it on the list for a 30 second headway bus route way back. Barking.

ASLEF at the time suggested joining them all up to form (wait for it) - TRAINS..

 

[ska invita]

i like it but am still campaigning for my idea of turning the canal network into a national bicycle superhighway

 

[Puddy_Tat]

i like it but am still campaigning for my idea of turning the canal network into a national bicycle superhighway

wouldn't the cyclists get kinda wet?

 

[ska invita]

Sponsorship? A la Barclays Cycle hire parhaps?

barclays only put a tiny amount in the pot for their sponsorship IIRC

 

[ska invita]

wouldn't the cyclists get kinda wet?

nah you fill the canals in

 

[KeeperofDragons]

Looks good but will never get off the ground so to speak, roads are the priority and have been for a long long time; what's the safety of a few cyclists compared to cars, lorries & buses getting where they want to quicker? Cyclists come a loooong loooong way down the list & I can't see any change in the near future.

 

[SpookyFrank]

So this would be a limited access type cycle route, one where, like a motorway, you can only get on or of it at certain places. Naturally people will need to travel to places where there isn't a skycycle offramp thingy, so folk will still need to use the roads a fair bit. With all the cost and fuss involved in building all this stuff for cyclists, motorists will become even more embittered against cyclists using 'their' roads and with fewer bikes around at street level people will most likely start to drive in a less bike-aware and thus more cyclist-squishing manner.

Existing cycle provisions at ground level may be removed to make more room for motorists, again making cycling less safe for those who aren't on the big flyover thingy. In fact the only way it would be possible to sell this to your average audi-driving cunt would be with the promise of removing both cyclists and cycle paths from their precious roads so that they can enjoy their traffic jams unencumbered by the infuriating site of cheerful cyclists whizzing past them. The people who currently think it's OK to run down cyclists because they don't pay the entirely fictional 'road tax' will start using, 'you should be on the cycle route' as an excuse instead.

 

[DJWrongspeed]

I was thinking about this, wouldn't a better idea be to build it above the roads or pavement? A bit like a skytrain thing as in Bangkok or New York. Obviously a much narrower and cheaper construction.

 

[likesfish]

Ok its a bonkers as boris island but should be talked about for the next five year with plenty of photoshop as it may induce heart attacks in I pay my road tax types.
So improving road safety by killing wankers

 

[SpookyFrank]

Ok its a bonkers as boris island but should be talked about for the next five year with plenty of photoshop as it may induce heart attacks in I pay my road tax types.
So improving road safety by killing wankers

Kick all the wankers out of London and it would look like that bit where Cillian Murphy first wakes up in 28 Days Later.