Talk:Picc-Vic tunnel

Untitled

The platforms under the Arndale Centre are believed by many to be an urban myth - no one has ever confirmed their existance and no physical record of them appears to remain - as admitted in this article.

Some websites speak of an empty "box" which the railway station would have been built in, but confirmation of that is also hard to find.

I'd suggest rewording, although how is another matter

Bods 10:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Station names

There's some variance on station names - I've inserted names which are listed in my source (1971 leaflet) but I'd be interested to know where the other names come from (Whitworth, Central etc).Wikidwitch (talk) 23:20, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I can confirm your alternate station names from a copy of the SELNEC report "Public transport plan for the future" published January 1973. The stations names here are clearly: "Whitworth", "Central" and "Royal Exchange" (Names quoted in the main article are nowhere to be found in this report)

SECOND TUNNEL By the way there is also mention of a potential second tunnel from Piccadilly to Knott Mill via Royal Exchange! It was called the "East/West Connection" running in the "Deansgate Tunnel" in the report and presumably this would have led to a major underground interchange at Royal Exchange.

URBAN MYTH re construction of the tunnel The rumour goes that during construction of the Arndale Centre, builders came across a long ready made cavern which ran from the edge of their development towards Royal Exhange (roughly below Cross Street). When I worked at Manchester City Council I found one person in the planning dpt who was sure that there was a single locked door in the basement of the Arndale which led to this supposed tunnel. Would love to go have a look one day!

--Mapmark (talk) 11:19, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

hey thanks - really interesting stuff. If your copy of the report was available online somewhere it would be great to read it (got a scanner?). As for the station names, Selnec obviously came up with some new names by 73. The diagram I scanned from the 1971 publicity must be provisional names which were later given snappier titles. There's very little else out there on the web about this project, strangely fascinating though. Wikidwitch (talk) 14:26, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

exhibition

there is some info at http://www.manchester.ac.uk/aboutus/news/display/?id=8056 about the Infra_MANC exhibition on the pic-vic line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.36.2.37 (talk) 13:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Picc-Vic tunnel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070911034934/http://www.metromapsoftheworld.com/PipeDreams/PiccVic/ to http://www.metromapsoftheworld.com/PipeDreams/PiccVic/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:40, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Underground tunnel

@Lard Almighty: I'm not sure I follow you. Mode of transportation would be assumed underground, since it's a tunnel, correct? A subway tunnel is almost always underground too? I mean, the term subway is redundant too. Leitmotiv (talk) 17:59, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

It is just to be as specific as possible. This was a plan for a new underground line so it doesn't hurt to specify that in the body of the article. And anyway a tunnel isn't always underground. If you have ever driven in mountains you will have driven through tunnels that are built over the road to protect it from avalanches, for example. Lard Almighty (talk) 18:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)