On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 19:15:14 +0100, Pigeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 05:48:24AM +0200, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 19:23:43 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > > > Just in case you *aren't* being sarcastic, or there are people on > > > the list from places that are far, far from subway trains: yes, > > > subways have their own dedicated tracks. Of course, when the > > > power > > > > ..excellent. Problem is, not all subway-like operators has been > > smart enough to separate their tracks from the heavy irons, I > > known of a few nice "Now what?" Quake-like tunnel scenarios. > > The London Underground was originally designed to allow through > running from the mainline railways to stations more convenient for > central London than the mainline termini, which were very much on the > outskirts of the London of the time. There are several connections > between the two systems, and the "suburbs" end of several Underground > routes is reached over main line track, so Underground drivers on such > routes have to know two sets of operating rules, Underground rules and > national rules. ..this sounds like a _very_ good time to pour a shipload of concrete onto those wintendo-style dual rule tracks, to replace the nice hard rock that _should_ have separated those two track systems. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
