Linslade Tunnel - Why so architecturally elegant?

[Bald Rick]

This is one of the locations I can't see Avanti's new 80x running at 125mph - it's one of the locations which has lower EPS speed restrictions for Voyagers.

I’d be surprised if it is much more than 90 for the new trains. 90 is a stretch now for non tilt.

There are 4 tunnels in Bedfordshire and this is the only one that has any grandeur about it.

I must admit I've learned a lot about tunnel portals today

Well three of them are here

Correct if I'm wrong, is the down fast bore at Linslade tunnel, a really tight bore, smaller than the up slow ?

I think they are much the same, but could be wrong.

 

[richieb1971]

I’d be surprised if it is much more than 90 for the new trains. 90 is a stretch now for non tilt.



Well three of them are here



I think they are much the same, but could be wrong.

Linslade doesn't count as 3 tunnels it counts as 1.
Sharnbrook Tunnel
Ampthill Tunnel
Old Warden Tunnel

Are the other 3.

Neither Linslade, Leighton Station or the four tunnels were built in Bedfordshire.

Don't know what you mean.

 

[kje7812]

Don't know what you mean.

Presumably they are referring to the fact that Linslade was part of Buckinghamshire prior to a boundary change in 1965.

 

[ABB125]

View attachment 98225

How boring! Surely we can do better on the biggest infrastructure project in Britain (and Europe?)?

Presumably they are referring to the fact that Linslade was part of Buckinghamshire prior to a boundary change in 1965.

Oh no, do I detect some debate about historical vs traditional vs contemporary vs I DON'T CARE county boundaries?
(It doesn't mean anything to me, by the way!)

 

[geoffk]

Slightly deviating (!) from the subject, the Ffestiniog Railway's Moelwyn Tunnel has attractive new stone portals. These are not as elaborate as Linslade, Clayton or Bramhope but are an improvement on the plain concrete originals built for the deviation in 1976/7.

 

[XAM2175]

How boring! Surely we can do better on the biggest infrastructure project in Britain (and Europe?)?

For the benefit of whom?

 

[ABB125]

For the benefit of whom?

If nothing else, a more decorative tunnel portal means the NIMBYs can't say "look at that ugly solid concrete monstrosity".
Looking at it the other way, why bother to make the stations architecturally exciting, when s plain concrete box will do the job just as well? Admittedly more people will see the station than the portals, but the portals aren't invisible.

 

[zwk500]

If nothing else, a more decorative tunnel portal means the NIMBYs can't say "look at that ugly solid concrete monstrosity".
Looking at it the other way, why bother to make the stations architecturally exciting, when s plain concrete box will do the job just as well? Admittedly more people will see the station than the portals, but the portals aren't invisible.

Cost vs benefit. It'd be rather less fuss to invite somebody along with a tin of paint, like the french did for their Eurotunnel portal at Coquelles

 

[NoRoute]

For the benefit of whom?

For the benefit of all the people who will look upon it over the next few hundred years, and those who have had it imposed on their community.

There's natural beauty in a hillside or a landscape, if an engineering project is going to push a railway through it then a little attention to art and design to leave something attractive isn't a big demand. To build something to the bare minimum cost with little or no effort to make it attractive shows a certain degree of contempt for the landscape.

 

[najaB]

For the benefit of all the people who will look upon it over the next few hundred years, and those who have had it imposed on their community.

Much easier, simpler and cheaper to paint it to blend in.

 

[geoffk]

For the benefit of all the people who will look upon it over the next few hundred years, and those who have had it imposed on their community.

There's natural beauty in a hillside or a landscape, if an engineering project is going to push a railway through it then a little attention to art and design to leave something attractive isn't a big demand. To build something to the bare minimum cost with little or no effort to make it attractive shows a certain degree of contempt for the landscape.

The concrete structures on the Borders Railway would look so much better built with local stone but no money presumably for "non-essentials". If we want a complete set of ornate tunnel mouths, then Box, Middle Hill and Audley End should be added.

 

[Bald Rick]

Linslade doesn't count as 3 tunnels it counts as 1

It is unquestionably 3 tunnels, all at Linslade!

 

[richieb1971]

It is unquestionably 3 tunnels, all at Linslade!

Its 7 tunnels then.

 

[zwk500]

For the benefit of all the people who will look upon it over the next few hundred years, and those who have had it imposed on their community.

There's natural beauty in a hillside or a landscape, if an engineering project is going to push a railway through it then a little attention to art and design to leave something attractive isn't a big demand. To build something to the bare minimum cost with little or no effort to make it attractive shows a certain degree of contempt for the landscape.

Genuine open question, which is better?

The absolute bare minimum, with maximum natural grass and hillside and bare minimum of concrete. (North Downs, HS1)

Huge ostentatious edifice of bricks and mortar (Clayton, Brighton Mainline): Or one of more local stone (Summit, Calder Valley):

Or taking a concrete pad as a blank canvas and doing something funky with it: (Coquelles Portal of Channel Tunnel)

 

[najaB]

Genuine open question, which is better?

My preference in order: small portal in natural stone, minimal with grass, painted concrete, and castellated last.

 

[jfowkes]

If nothing else, a more decorative tunnel portal means the NIMBYs can't say "look at that ugly solid concrete monstrosity".

You can't please (most) NIMBYs.

If you make it fancy, they'll just complain about it not blending in, or being too expensive, or being too cheap, or not using local materials, or using the wrong local materials.

NIMBYs gotta NIMBY.

 

[Grumpy Git]

Can't beat the natural one as per the Summit example, its a proper portal that.

 

[D6130]

IIRC, does the next WCML tunnel South of Linslade, at Northchurch, not also have quite ornamental Northern Portals?

 

[XAM2175]

If nothing else, a more decorative tunnel portal means the NIMBYs can't say "look at that ugly solid concrete monstrosity".
Looking at it the other way, why bother to make the stations architecturally exciting, when s plain concrete box will do the job just as well? Admittedly more people will see the station than the portals, but the portals aren't invisible.

I'd rather taken the impression from your earlier posts that the prime rationale was so that a teenager on the internet had something more interesting to look at than "modern concrete rubbish".

For the benefit of all the people who will look upon it over the next few hundred years, and those who have had it imposed on their community.

There's natural beauty in a hillside or a landscape, if an engineering project is going to push a railway through it then a little attention to art and design to leave something attractive isn't a big demand. To build something to the bare minimum cost with little or no effort to make it attractive shows a certain degree of contempt for the landscape.

You are assuming that the portals will be highly conspicuous. I was challenging the notion that "boring" portals are automatically undesirable and in need of tarting-up, when it is in fact entirely possible to mitigate their aesthetic impact in other ways - and particularly so in comparison to structures like bridges and viaducts and stations.

 

[NoRoute]

Genuine open question, which is better?

Of the pictures you've attached, personally I would say the (not very neutrally / unbiased-ly titled!) 'Huge ostentatious edifice of bricks and mortar'.

The first, bare minimum, is bare minimum at the tunnel entrance but has a large area fenced off around the entrance with utilitarian gray fencing , the sides of the cutting haven't naturalised with any grass or shrubs so it looks like a builder's yard at the tunnel entrance. Not pretty. The last one, painted concrete, again has a tunnel with the bare minimum but its hidden behind the clutter of the OHL system, with some painting as an afterthought. Looks like a token gesture to do something cheaply with a large blank area of concrete - build it to minimum cost and get a tin a paint at the end.

Both the first and last are purely functional, they're tunnels but nothing more with no effort made to incorporate any art or design into the construction, no one is ever going to look up the designer or architect of those two. The middle one, with the bricks and mortar, the designers have tried to give the tunnel some presence, some hint of grandeur by framing it as the grand entrance to something important.

And that last bit probably is the key, when these old railway tunnels were built they were something pretty amazing and important. They were the grand engineering projects of their day, those tunnels were linking great cities with a revolutionary form of transport transforming the country, built by new stock companies building out their network. Modern railway projects don't have the same significance.

 

[Albaman]

Correct if I'm wrong, is the down fast bore at Linslade tunnel, a really tight bore, smaller than the up slow ?

In " Britain's New Railway " by O.S. Nock , published in 1966, specific reference is made to the arrangement for OHL support in the Linslade single line tunnel but, unfortunately, it does not specify which one.

 

[themiller]

I’m not a fan of ‘arty farty’ stuff so, for me, the simpler the better. It’s easy to maintain, it’s going to tone down in time, there’s no chance of superfluous masonry falling on the line or trains and doesn’t require an ‘artist’ to graffiti it.

 

[jfowkes]

It's worth pointing out that the HS2 portals won't just be in a bare concrete face, they will have "hoods" added for shock prevention. This rail engineer article explains it well.

I think the artists impression looks quite good in its own right, has a sort of retro-futuristic look about it. Whether its anywhere near what gets built is a different story obviously.

 

[Cheshire Rover]

Sutton tunnel on the Chester to Warrington BQ line looks well.
Photo sourced from http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/s/sutton_tunnel/
Photo by Paul Wright

 

[Annetts key]

I would hesitate to suggest that signals are necessary to allow for the operation of a modern railway, these days!

I will get my coat.

Could always remove the signals and have a token system for each line instead

I’m not a fan of ‘arty farty’ stuff so, for me, the simpler the better. It’s easy to maintain, it’s going to tone down in time, there’s no chance of superfluous masonry falling on the line or trains and doesn’t require an ‘artist’ to graffiti it.

Alas, just because it’s made of concrete does not stop bits falling off. At some point in the future, the weather will find a way to crack the concrete and then either ice or plant roots will force the crack wider until eventually bits will fall off. True, it may take longer than a stone or brick tunnel, but it will happen eventually.

With a dressed stone or brick arch, although they require far more maintenance (primary of the mortar), it’s possible and practical to replace any stones or bricks if needed. Not so easy to repair concrete.

 

[najaB]

Not so easy to repair concrete.

As long as the reinforcing steel isn't compromised it's fairly easy.

 

[Grecian 1998]

Two other factors which would have influenced the elegance of tunnel portals:

1. A lot of early Victorians were terrified of travelling through long tunnels behind a smoke belching locomotive - not helped by some 'scientists' such as Dionysius Lardner. Creating elegant portals was probably a way of reassuring travellers that they were not about to enter some stygian portal to the underworld. Box Tunnel for instance has a very high roof at the entrance, although this comes down inside once in the dark.

In comparison, one of the few arguments anti-HS2 campaigners haven't yet asserted is that travellers risk asphyxiation. I probably shouldn't give them ideas.

2. A lot of the most elegant portals are next to what were or are main roads. Clayton Tunnel and Summit Tunnel above are examples, as is Box Tunnel. Both Clayton and Box have much plainer portals at the southern / eastern end respectively where they aren't visible from main roads (not sure about Summit). A check on Google Maps indicates that assuming that is the north end of Linslade Tunnel, the same rule applies.

Clearly there seems to have been a desire to show off a bit / advertise to road travellers by Victorian builders.

Curiously the numerous tunnels on the Derby-Sheffield section of the MML seem consistently to have more elegant portals at the northern end than the south. Not sure why.

 

[och aye]

View attachment 98219

Its a shame that so much clutter was put right in front of it.

Were there ever any plans for a bore in-between the 2nd and 4th bores, or was it always just designed to have 3 bores?

 

[HSP 2]

It can be done if you put the money into it.
Woodhead old tunnels on the left and the new one.

Photo off the internet.

 

[najaB]

Were there ever any plans for a bore in-between the 2nd and 4th bores, or was it always just designed to have 3 bores?

It does look unbalanced as is.