> When most cities build metro systems, they simply blast through rock.
I'm not sure that this is true (ignoring the bit about blasting, which hasn't been a standard way to build metro lines for a very long time, of course); there was a lot found when London's Crossrail was built, say.
(While it's not made totally clear, I assume they're mostly finding stuff building stations, not tunnels. The tunnels are ~20m below ground, but the stations have to go all the way to the surface.)
> (While it's not made totally clear, I assume they're mostly finding stuff building stations, not tunnels. The tunnels are ~20m below ground, but the stations have to go all the way to the surface.)
This is exactly right. Rome's subway is famously dug very deep (30-80 meters) so the tunnels run under the ruins, but each station requires an excavation down to tunnel depth.
Blasting through rock is expensive and only done if needed - I'd suspect that most projects now are cut and cover or tunnel boring machine - both of which can also be terribly expensive (see: Seattle).
Blasting through hard rock is easy. Finland has perfect rock and makes lots of tunnels with blasting. Soft rock needs support so TBM tunnels and shores up.
That's great to hear, I've only been in it once (I prefer to cycle on the waterfront), but I hear the ticket machines still don't accept cards. Typical Greece, though it's nice that it actually works well for what it is.
I was there now during both Easters, they do actually, the biggest problem is having different cards for metro and bus.
Actually we have the same problem in Lisbon and Porto, the cards you can top up are company specific, only the monthly subscriptions work across companies.
I meant credit cards, it used to be that you can only pay cash. I agree, though, in London everything just takes credit cards so you have no dedicated ticket cards. Much more convenient.
For reasons, I used to go to Rome quite frequently in the 2010s, and the construction of Metro C was already a meme. But now some of the stations are quite interesting indeed.
I have to wonder sometimes what an ancient Roman would think of modern Rome. What artifacts would be they grateful to see preserved, and which by contrast would have them thinking 'haha, you dorks care about that?'
It's quite interesting to see how much earth is typically above ancient ruins. Cities built upon cities for 1000's of years where a street or building was once at ground level and now is 2-4 stories beneath our modern world.
While visiting Vienna, there are ruins on display in Michaelerplatz (central Old City), so cool.
I've always been confused how this works. Did people shovel soil on top of buildings then build new buildings on that? Why? Did it accumulate naturally perhaps during periods when a site was unoccupied? Would some buildings be higher than their older neighbors, with entrances above street-level until everyone else caught up?
Okay, I'll say it: is it really worth encumbering the movements of millions of people for decades in order to make a few boring history exhibits? If you want to see some the bone comb that belonged to somebody's great^100-grandmother, there are dozens of museums that already have one on display.
> When most cities build metro systems, they simply blast through rock.
I'm not sure that this is true (ignoring the bit about blasting, which hasn't been a standard way to build metro lines for a very long time, of course); there was a lot found when London's Crossrail was built, say.
(While it's not made totally clear, I assume they're mostly finding stuff building stations, not tunnels. The tunnels are ~20m below ground, but the stations have to go all the way to the surface.)
Really, any old city, anytime you build anything you may find something. For instance, here's a supermarket with bonus Viking ruins in Dublin: https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/aungier-street-lidl-arch...
> (While it's not made totally clear, I assume they're mostly finding stuff building stations, not tunnels. The tunnels are ~20m below ground, but the stations have to go all the way to the surface.)
This is exactly right. Rome's subway is famously dug very deep (30-80 meters) so the tunnels run under the ruins, but each station requires an excavation down to tunnel depth.
Blasting through rock is expensive and only done if needed - I'd suspect that most projects now are cut and cover or tunnel boring machine - both of which can also be terribly expensive (see: Seattle).
Blasting through hard rock is easy. Finland has perfect rock and makes lots of tunnels with blasting. Soft rock needs support so TBM tunnels and shores up.
Yeah, this one looks to be TBM for most of the underground sections.
In Sofia we have roman ruins everywhere around metro stations https://archaeology-travel.com/bulgaria/serdika-ii-metro-sta...
In the same vein, Bloomberg office in London UK has an Ancient Rome museum and the access is free: https://www.bloomberg.org/arts/advancing-the-arts-around-wor... (disclosure: I work for Bloomberg).
I’ve visited the Mithraeum. It’s maybe not a must see for a tourist, but great that it’s publicly available for free.
Thessaloniki had the same issue, and now there's a stop where you have walkways above the ruins.
Some photos of the "before" here:
https://www.thessalonikiguide.gr/metro-thessalonikis-mia-arx...
As one of the cities I spend part of my life, the new metro experience is great, and how they integrated the stations into old Greek infrastructure.
I only morn the loss of jobs that could have been part of the metro, if the wagons weren't robots.
That's great to hear, I've only been in it once (I prefer to cycle on the waterfront), but I hear the ticket machines still don't accept cards. Typical Greece, though it's nice that it actually works well for what it is.
I was there now during both Easters, they do actually, the biggest problem is having different cards for metro and bus.
Actually we have the same problem in Lisbon and Porto, the cards you can top up are company specific, only the monthly subscriptions work across companies.
I meant credit cards, it used to be that you can only pay cash. I agree, though, in London everything just takes credit cards so you have no dedicated ticket cards. Much more convenient.
For reasons, I used to go to Rome quite frequently in the 2010s, and the construction of Metro C was already a meme. But now some of the stations are quite interesting indeed.
I have to wonder sometimes what an ancient Roman would think of modern Rome. What artifacts would be they grateful to see preserved, and which by contrast would have them thinking 'haha, you dorks care about that?'
It's quite interesting to see how much earth is typically above ancient ruins. Cities built upon cities for 1000's of years where a street or building was once at ground level and now is 2-4 stories beneath our modern world.
While visiting Vienna, there are ruins on display in Michaelerplatz (central Old City), so cool.
I've always been confused how this works. Did people shovel soil on top of buildings then build new buildings on that? Why? Did it accumulate naturally perhaps during periods when a site was unoccupied? Would some buildings be higher than their older neighbors, with entrances above street-level until everyone else caught up?
In a place like Rome with layers and layers of deep history they should just think of building elevated metro systems.
Okay, I'll say it: is it really worth encumbering the movements of millions of people for decades in order to make a few boring history exhibits? If you want to see some the bone comb that belonged to somebody's great^100-grandmother, there are dozens of museums that already have one on display.
The problem isn’t the present tense. The problem is once those artefacts are destroyed then they’re destroyed forever.
They might find some important writing that can shed light on history.
Yes. I travel around the world looking for such things.
Is it encumbering? It seems like it's not at all.
Is it really worth? YMMV, but yes if you ask me.