[cmajewsk]

I don't know about 'too old', but it is old. It states in the article that..." the London Underground, opened in the city 150 years ago.:

The county I am living in currently, will be celebrating only its 42 birthday tomorrow...think about it.

[sambeau]

To add a little perspective I live in rural England in a small thatched house that appears on a map dated 1420.

That's 30 years before Christopher Columbus was born — and Richard III; 100 years before Queen Elizabeth I was born.

It was built before chimneys were invented: one was fitted at some point, probably at the same time the upstairs floor was put in (you can't have an upstairs without a chimney). The refurbishment date is scratched into the plaster work: Feb 1722.

[claudius]

And I am very thankful that the undergrounds in the cities where I spent most of my time were built much later: Tunnelling techniques evolved quickly during the late 18th and early 19th century, allowing for much more ‘comfortable’ tunnel diameters – there is a reason the London Underground is called the tube, it’s difficult to stand in most of its trains.

[quarterto]

> late 18th and early 19th century

The first underground lines were in 1863. That's the mid 19th century. The first deep level train (what's actually the Tube) was the City & South London Railway, opened in 1890 (late 19th century). Check yo fax.

> it’s difficult to stand in most of its trains

Not unless you're like 6' 6" (and thus taller than 99.5% of males). http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/62018000/jpg/_62018161...

[claudius]

> > late 18th and early 19th century

> opened in 1890 (late 19th century). Check yo fax.

HN, of all communities, should be familiar with off-by-one errors. My apologies for the confusion; you are right, I was referring to the late 19th and early 20th century.

[sokoloff]

"Check yo fax" is not consistent with the standards of the HN community (nor with the overall high quality of the rest of your comment).

[archangel_one]

Nope - the newest lines (Victoria, Jubilee) are all smaller diameter trains. The larger, squarer cut+covers (District, Circle, Metropolitan etc) are generally older, because you can't cut a trench across London for a new Tube line any more.

It's still not hard to stand on any of the trains as long as you're not right beside the door on a Tube (unless you're extremely unusually tall, but the odds are well against that).

[therobotking]

This is complete nonsense. It's perfectly easy to stand up in the underground train cars.

[nemesisj]

There are two sizes of tube trains - "deep tube" and "sub surface" trains. The deep tube trains are much smaller, and they are difficult to stand in if you're near the doors for anyone who's over 6 feet (I'm 6'4"). That said, it's not the end of the world, as you're only standing there when it's crowded, but it does happen.

See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground#Trains

[ColinWright]

How tall are you? I'm 5'11", or 1.80 m, and I have no trouble at all standing in trains on the London underground.

[claudius]

Roughly 1.95m and while standing in the very middle is possible, it does feel more like an airplane rather than a train. Admittedly, I also like to have some space above my head and don’t always feel perfectly comfortable in tight spaces, so that might well contribute to a (perceived) lack of space.

[justincormack]

Most of the early ones were "cut and cover" and quite big, rather than bored. And there is little difference in the sizes of the tunnelled ones.

[corin_]

That's a little like looking at a baby who was born a year ago and calling it old because of another that was born earlier today.

[nailer]

London is a Roman town, much older than England (edit: and that's just name, as the poster below mentions the city has existed much longer). the queen still has to ask permission to enter the City (now called the square mile). The underground (aka the Tube) is new, but the city itself is very, very old.

[trumbitta2]

London is actually pre-roman, maybe pre-celtic, tbh.

[corin_]

Sorry, I wasn't commenting on the age of London, just the method of defining any country/city as old compared to a decades-old country.