Suche löschen...
Mechanics magazine
- Bandzählung
- N.S. 13=82.1865
- Erscheinungsdatum
- 1865
- Sprache
- Englisch
- Signatur
- A146
- Vorlage
- Universitätsbibliothek Chemnitz
- Digitalisat
- Universitätsbibliothek Chemnitz
- Digitalisat
- SLUB Dresden
- Lizenz-/Rechtehinweis
- Public Domain Mark 1.0
- URN
- urn:nbn:de:bsz:14-db-id507363582-186500011
- PURL
- http://digital.slub-dresden.de/id507363582-18650001
- OAI-Identifier
- oai:de:slub-dresden:db:id-507363582-18650001
- Sammlungen
- Projekt: Bestände der Universitätsbibliothek Chemnitz
- LDP: Bestände der Universitätsbibliothek Chemnitz
- Strukturtyp
- Band
- Parlamentsperiode
- -
- Wahlperiode
- -
- Digitalisat
- SLUB Dresden
- Strukturtyp
- Ausgabe
- Parlamentsperiode
- -
- Wahlperiode
- -
-
Zeitschrift
Mechanics magazine
-
Band
Band N.S. 13=82.1865
-
- Titelblatt Titelblatt -
- Register Index I
- Register Illustrations to vol. XIII II
- Ausgabe January 13, 1865 19
- Ausgabe January 20, 1865 35
- Ausgabe January 27, 1865 51
- Ausgabe February 3, 1865 67
- Ausgabe No. 2105 I
- Ausgabe February 10, 1865 83
- Ausgabe February 17, 1865 99
- Ausgabe February 24, 1865 115
- Ausgabe March 3, 1865 131
- Ausgabe March 10, 1865 147
- Ausgabe March 17, 1865 163
- Ausgabe March 24, 1865 179
- Ausgabe March 31, 1865 195
- Ausgabe April 7, 1865 211
- Ausgabe April 14, 1865 227
- Ausgabe April 21, 1865 243
- Ausgabe April 28, 1865 259
- Ausgabe May 5, 1865 275
- Ausgabe May 12, 1865 291
- Ausgabe May 19, 1865 307
- Ausgabe May 26, 1865 325
- Ausgabe June 2, 1865 341
- Ausgabe June 9, 1865 359
- Ausgabe June 16, 1865 375
- Ausgabe June 23, 1865 391
- Ausgabe June 30, 1865 409
- Ausgabe No. 2102 I
- Ausgabe No. 2103 I
- Ausgabe No. 2104 I
- Ausgabe No. 2106 I
- Ausgabe No. 2107 I
- Ausgabe No. 2108 I
- Ausgabe No. 2109 I
- Ausgabe No. 2110 I
- Ausgabe No. 2111 I
- Ausgabe No. 2112 I
- Ausgabe No. 2113 I
- Ausgabe No. 2114 I
- Ausgabe No. 2115 I
- Ausgabe No. 2116 I
- Ausgabe No. 2117 I
- Ausgabe No. 2118 I
- Ausgabe No. 2119 I
- Ausgabe No. 2120 I
- Ausgabe No. 2121 I
- Ausgabe No. 2122 I
- Ausgabe No. 2123 I
- Ausgabe No. 2124 I
- Ausgabe No. 2125 I
- Ausgabe No. 2126 I
-
Band
Band N.S. 13=82.1865
-
- Titel
- Mechanics magazine
- Autor
- Links
- Downloads
- Einzelseite als Bild herunterladen (JPG)
-
Volltext Seite (XML)
February 17, 1865. 99 THE MECHANICS’ MAGAZINE. THE MECHANICS* MAGAZINE. LONDON: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1865. METROPOLITAN RAILWAYS. Parliament lias assembled, and in a short time the Committees of both Houses will commence their labours upon the nu merous bills awaiting their investigation. And their labours will be in no way light, in asmuch as there were no less than 595 peti tions for private bills deposited last Novem ber, of which number 461 are accompanied by plans. This is the highest number of de posits ever made, not excepting the time of the railway mania, nearly twenty years since, when there was an unprecedented run upon the Private Bill Office. But division of labour will effect great things in the way of clearing oft' work, as evidenced by the results of last session, which was an unusually heavy one. The method of economising time and reducing the labours of the members to a minimum will be similar to that adopted last year. All bills that have passed standing orders will undergo a preliminary examina tion upon merits by a joint committee of both houses, and will be disposed of according to circumstances under powers vested in the committee. Of the 595 bills deposited, 47 only are for works affecting the metropolis. This is a less number than were lodged for last session, and the proposed works are neither of such magnitude, nor of so expensive a nature, as those were, the total amount of proposed capital being only about seventeen millions. Out of these 47 schemes, 33 are for railways, em bodying 94 main lines and branches, the united lengths of which are about 104 miles. Mr. llazalgette, as engineer to the Metro politan Board, of Works, has just made his report on these proposed lines, and ho thus summarises them :— “ Five or six railways are proposed to branch from the principal northern railways, in a northerly direction, towards Enfield, Alexandra Park. Chipping Barnet, Rick- mansworth, and the suburbs. It is intended to carry one of the branches of the Edgware, Ilighgate, and London Railway, by open cutting through Finsbury Park, which would sever and destroy that park. Branches from the Blackwall Railway into the Isle of Hogs are again proposed. An underground line to Limehouse is projected, starting from the Metropolitan Railway at King’s Cross. A railway is proposed, with a new bridge over the Thames, from the Great Western Rail way to Brentford and Kingston, forming a junction with existing lines at Merton ; also a direct line from Clapham Junction to Kingston. Three companies seek to connect the railways north anil south of the Thames on the eastern side of the metropolis by passing under the Thames, two of them by making use of the existing Thames Tunnel, and the third by a new tunnel to be formed under the river near Blackwall. It is also roposed to lay pneumatic tubes under the ed of the Thames for a railway from Waterloo station to Whitehall, and numerous other minor connecting railways are contem plated.” The system of'motropolitan railway com munication was tolerably well perfected last session, by passing of the several bills which effected the completion of the inner circle railway, and by the sanctioning of several other collateral schemes. But no provision was made in any of the bills passed for the junc - tion below bridge of railways north and south of the Thames ; and thus an important link in the chain of perfect communication was wanting. The Select Committee of the House of Lords on metropolitan communi cation in 1863 came to the conclusion that heavy' goods traffic, and especially that of mineral traffic, could, as a general rule, be most conveniently carried from the rail ways lying north of the Thames to those south of the Thames by' lines not pass ing through the centre of the metropolis. They further indicated the most appropriate direction, by suggesting that there should be a line of railway' on the eastern side of the metropolis to connect the railways north and south of the Thames. Similar improvements were also recommended by the Metropolitan Board of Works in their report of February, 1864. There were several schemes for effecting this presented to Parliament last session; their objects were similar, but their proposed routes and methods of construction differed. Three schemes were popularly known as “ high level railways,” and were remarkable as involving the erection of a bridge of one span over the Thames, near the Tower. Ample headway being preserved for shipping, re quired the platform of the bridge to be made at a considerable elevation above high water line; hence the designation of the railways. These schemes were perfectly' practicable, but were thrown out by the joint committee, who were evidently partial to the tunnel lines. The other schemes proposed to utilise the Thames Tunnel; one only went into committee, and, after a fight near the close of the session, the bill was lost. This scheme appears for a second time, but with modifications to meet the views of opponents and supporters. Under the same title,—The East London and Thames Tunnel Railway,—it again proposes to supply the desideratum referred to, by connecting the Metropolitan, North London, Great Eastern, and Blackwall Extension Railways, with the London and Brighton, and the South Eastern Railways. A competing scheme to this is the Metropolitan and South London (Thames Tun nel) Railway, which passes under the London Docks, and through the Thames Tunnel, to the south side of the river. The objects of the proposed Blackwall, Greenwich, and Wool wich Railway, appear to ho of a similar cha racter to the foregoing; but the line itself takes a route lower down the river, passing under the Thames from Blackwall to Green- wich-marshes by a new tunnel 1,078 yards long, the rails being seventy-one feet below high-water mark. The possession of the Thames Tunnel route will ho warmly con tested, and, doubtless, the construction of this important piece of line will be authorised this session, thus establishing a line for the transmission of heavy traffic, to the great re lief of the main thoroughfares of the city' in general, and of Londen-bridge in particular. There is only' one other proposal for tunnel ling beneath the Thames, and that is the Waterloo and Whitehall Railway ; the object of this bill is to lay down a pneumatic line from Whitehall to the Waterloo Station, cross ing under the Thames to the southward of Charing-cross bridge. The Fulham Railways Bill is for several local lines, one of which is to cross the Thames by a bridge with four openings, each of 150 ft. span, and 20 ft. high, and this is the only scheme proposed which will pass over the river. Last session an act was obtained for a bridge over the Thames at this point, to be constructed on the rigid suspension principle. Now, as this system of bridge is applicable to railway or road traffic, or the two combined, it is worth suggesting that the railway com pany arrange to utilise the bridge for their line, which step will fortify their position, whilst the bridge company will be assisted in carrying out their works if the bill for the railway should pass. Of the remainder of the railway' bills nine teen refer to the north and nine to the south side of the Thames. Some of these bills are for new lines, some for additional powers or lands, and others for deviations. A reference to the report already' quoted shows that, with but few exceptions, the contemplated works interfere greatly with the sewers, in some in stances very seriously. This will necessitate the insertion of strong protective clauses, and full powers should be secured to the Metro politan Board of Works to enable them to enforce not only the reparation of any injury- done to their works by the carrying out of the various schemes that may pass, but also the repayment of any additional costs to which the B card may be thereby' put. The Board, should be vested with full authority to exercise a strict supervision with respect to bridges over the streets of the metropolis, and this for several reasons. Bridges over existing roads should bo of the full width of the roadway and footpaths in all cases, and the minimum span should be forty feet. The piers should, in no instance, be allowed to abut beyond the face of the adjacent houses. In cases where the houses have gardens in front, the span might be broken by a row of columns carrying side arches if the span he inconvenient for one opening. One great point to bo insisted on should be that in every bridge an ornamental character bo observed ; if this were attended to it would mitigate the necessary evil of having railway-bridges over our thorough fares. The gradients of road approaches require some attention. The Lands Clauses Act lays down the rates of inclination for altered roads, but the approaches so formed are far steeper than is consistent with the safe working of road traffic in the metropolis. The truth is, the Act was formed to meet the requirements of country roads, and now requires modifying to meet the contingencies of London traffic. Another essential of metropolitan railway' bridges is that they should be made water tight, or, at least, that the water collected on the railway above may be disposed of in some other manner than at present. It is now a general thing to find it distributed under neath the bridge in a shower of very large drops, between which the passenger in the road below has to dodge, and this, too, long after a fall of rain. But considerable diffi culty' is experienced in making the platforms of railway bridges sufficiently water-tight to prevent some water dripping through. On the Charing-cross Railway the platforms of the bridges were made practically water tight, but, as soon as the line was opened for traffic, signs of leakage appeared. Various methods have been tried to attain this object, but they have generally failed, chiefly, in con sequence of the vibration caused by trains. Instead of trying too particularly to prevent leakage, the better plan will be to assume that it must occur, and to provide for it by fixing corrugated iron under the bridge with proper gutters and down pipes, as has been done in many instances in bridges in and near London. This arrangement would not only meet the point, but might be made to improve the ap pearance of the undersido of many of our railway' bridges. In the suburbs of London there are yet to be found districts, which, though not yet laid out for building purposes, will sooner or later be appropriated. Now, just such spots as these are very inviting to railway projectors as affording a cheap piece of line. Therefore, as such lines, if constructed, may hereafter prove great obstructions to the developing of new thoroughfar.es, it is only fair that provision should be made in such bills for the erection by' the companies of such means of communica tion as may hereafter become necessary, and local authorities should see to this, or they may suffer. It is generally conceded that railways in London must bo chiefly, if not altogether, tunnel lines. This was clearly the opinion of the joint committee last session, when they recommended the postponement of bills for railways overhead or in open cuttings, while they proposed that many of those in tunnel should be proceeded with, and the proper place for London railways is in tunnel far removed from sight and hearing. But these tunnels will have to be placed at considerable depths.
- Aktuelle Seite (TXT)
- METS Datei (XML)
- IIIF Manifest (JSON)