Whats the reason why the Eurotunnel is not a drive through tunnel even though it was possible to do?
The Eurotunnel between Dover and calais was originally planned in the early 19th century. Works took place in the 19th century but kept on being put on hold by the British. The original plan was for horses to be able to go through the tunnel. In the Mid-20th century, the UK and French government planned for a drive through tunnel but instead, a train carrier was put in place. Both governments are still discussing having a drive through tunnel, and it has always been possible. But way didn't they make in into a drive through tunnel from the beginning?
Answers:
It comes down mainly to risk. On a train you have one person driving it who is trained and experienced and does it for a living. That person knows how fast they can safely go thorugh the tunnel If everyone was driving you increase the risk of accident by driver error massively.
I would not like to be involved in a crash half way through
Too easy to march through.
Just in case people drink and drive.
I guess be difficult to clear if there was an accident. Plus easier to regulate. Plus you can charge to use the train.
Have you ever seen how the French drive? Besides, you'd have to switch sides half way through.
1) quicker form of transport
2) easier to charge people
3) provides a direct quick link between the two nations capitals
4) safer- less margin for human error than in a car
The idea for a 'eurotunnel' was not originally planned in the 19th century. Such an ambitious plan was actually dreamt up byt he romans in the 1st century. They were looking at ways to invade and conquer England.
Anyway to answer your question, the planning committee behind the chunnel had two main areas of concern over safety.
1. Terrorist attack
2. Accident
Both of these would result in a possible initial loss of life. May both lead to fire, toxic fumes.
Would lead to congestion, leading to mass panic.
The idea behind the trains was submitted and approved.
The real reason it was not drive through is the fact that the UK drive on the opposite side of the road, so where would the change be? Therre are loads of accidents within the first few miles from the crossing on both sides of the channel, these would happen in the tunnel and block it for long periods.
They'd need much better ventilation. Aren't the Eurostar trains electric? Think of the toxic exhaust gases from lorries and cars.
Governments like taking money off people basically - Anyway they can - the more it costs you! The more they get!
We are like skimmed milk, they are the ones doing the skimming & the milking! And we are reduced.
Answers:
It comes down mainly to risk. On a train you have one person driving it who is trained and experienced and does it for a living. That person knows how fast they can safely go thorugh the tunnel If everyone was driving you increase the risk of accident by driver error massively.
I would not like to be involved in a crash half way through
Too easy to march through.
Just in case people drink and drive.
I guess be difficult to clear if there was an accident. Plus easier to regulate. Plus you can charge to use the train.
Have you ever seen how the French drive? Besides, you'd have to switch sides half way through.
1) quicker form of transport
2) easier to charge people
3) provides a direct quick link between the two nations capitals
4) safer- less margin for human error than in a car
The idea for a 'eurotunnel' was not originally planned in the 19th century. Such an ambitious plan was actually dreamt up byt he romans in the 1st century. They were looking at ways to invade and conquer England.
Anyway to answer your question, the planning committee behind the chunnel had two main areas of concern over safety.
1. Terrorist attack
2. Accident
Both of these would result in a possible initial loss of life. May both lead to fire, toxic fumes.
Would lead to congestion, leading to mass panic.
The idea behind the trains was submitted and approved.
The real reason it was not drive through is the fact that the UK drive on the opposite side of the road, so where would the change be? Therre are loads of accidents within the first few miles from the crossing on both sides of the channel, these would happen in the tunnel and block it for long periods.
They'd need much better ventilation. Aren't the Eurostar trains electric? Think of the toxic exhaust gases from lorries and cars.
Governments like taking money off people basically - Anyway they can - the more it costs you! The more they get!
We are like skimmed milk, they are the ones doing the skimming & the milking! And we are reduced.
The answers post by the user, for information only, UKQnA.com does not guarantee the right.