r/Glasgow Tools

Title
Author	eenbiertje
Comment	There's technical reasons that make it more costly but not impossible. * Something about difficult geology of the Clyde Valley, meaning the city sits on a lot of soft ground which doesn't lend itself to easy deep tunneling. * We use a weird, very small track gauge (width of the two rails). 4ft exactly I think (I think only one in the world?), which is a fair bit smaller than standard gauge of 4ft 8inches. Means the track infrastructure and rolling stock is that bit more costly to procure. * Glasgow has a seriously extensive suburban rail network compared to most UK cities (even many comparable mainland European cities). As this network developed, there was less need to expand the subway system (with its weird track gauge). * This is related to the underlying point. Geology, track gauge and related issues can be overcome (perhaps at significant cost) if the will or need is there. Thing was that the 20th century brought a significant depopulation of Glasgow proper, as people moved to the suburbs and new towns. Cars and the planned motorway and heavy road network to carry them were the focus for infrastructure investment. New metro lines covering Glasgow council areas like the east end or southside didn't make as much economic sense with decreased population densities. These areas were also meant to have easy access to the unbuilt highway network too. The thinking was people would use private cars, or failing that, existing rail and bus services. I can sorta see how that would've made sense in a perverse way, had the motorway network been built in full (thank god it wasn't). But since it wasn't, it seems all the more strange that new metro or rail lines aren't there to carry people across the city.
Reddit Link	https://www.reddit.com/r/glasgow/comments/hrlzyi/we_might_be_small_but_were_on_there/fy6abu9/
Created	Wed 15th Jul 2020 8:11pm
Status	normal ()

There's technical reasons that make it more costly but not impossible.

* Something about difficult geology of the Clyde Valley, meaning the city sits on a lot of soft ground which doesn't lend itself to easy deep tunneling.

* We use a weird, very small track gauge (width of the two rails). 4ft exactly I think (I think only one in the world?), which is a fair bit smaller than standard gauge of 4ft 8inches. Means the track infrastructure and rolling stock is that bit more costly to procure.

* Glasgow has a seriously extensive suburban rail network compared to most UK cities (even many comparable mainland European cities). As this network developed, there was less need to expand the subway system (with its weird track gauge).

* This is related to the underlying point. Geology, track gauge and related issues can be overcome (perhaps at significant cost) if the will or need is there. Thing was that the 20th century brought a significant depopulation of Glasgow proper, as people moved to the suburbs and new towns. Cars and the planned motorway and heavy road network to carry them were the focus for infrastructure investment. New metro lines covering Glasgow council areas like the east end or southside didn't make as much economic sense with decreased population densities. These areas were also meant to have easy access to the unbuilt highway network too. The thinking was people would use private cars, or failing that, existing rail and bus services. I can *sorta* see how that would've made sense in a perverse way, had the motorway network been built in full (thank god it wasn't). But since it wasn't, it seems all the more strange that new metro or rail lines aren't there to carry people across the city.