
London’s Crossrail Is a $21B Test of Virtual Modeling - phodo
http://spectrum.ieee.org/transportation/mass-transit/londons-crossrail-is-a-21-billion-test-of-virtual-modeling
======
igravious
I've been hearing more and more about BIM (building information modeling)
recently. Seems like that their total commitment to BIM was a key component of
this massive project.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building_information_modeling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building_information_modeling)

I'm wondering what might happen if the wealth of structured information within
some of these mega-projects finds its way onto the internet. I recognise that
a lot of the construction data must be proprietary but what if were possible
to open up some of this construction data? Perhaps this is an area the Open
knowledge Foundation (or someone like them) should be tracking, assuming they
are not already. [https://okfn.org/](https://okfn.org/)

ps: Superb in-depth article. I love me some mega-project info, don't know why!

~~~
fsloth
Given the current security climate I would be amazed if anyone succeeds in
opening datasets like this for the public. Given that with full access to
structural data anyone can find the best ways to do all sorts of things. I'm
not saying that someone would use it for planning demolitions, virtually train
for troop operations or to figure out the best way to flood the system with
gas, but because the use cases are so obvious...

------
fblp
The numbers behind this project are quite amazing:
[http://www.crossrail.co.uk/news/crossrail-in-
numbers](http://www.crossrail.co.uk/news/crossrail-in-numbers)

------
fsloth
Does anyone have detailed information on the technology stack? What software
are they using for the large scale modeling and model management? Is the AR
solution referred to in the article custom? Whose bluetooth beacons are they
using for indoor positioning?

------
oliyoung
Literally in awe of the engineering it takes to build something like this, let
alone metres beneath one of the world's largest cities

------
jensen123
Good example of doing something well, that probably shouldn't have been done
at all. This will make London a better city to live in, causing even more
people to move there. This will make it even bigger than it already is. This
will make it an even more attractive target for terrorism. This will cause the
UK to enact even more police state like laws on surveillance etc.

Why on earth don't they spend that money building a subway in some other UK
city instead?

~~~
barnabee
Making London (or any city) better to live in is a good idea if it's
affordable, as is attracting more people to places that have a relative
advantage in attracting investment and creating jobs. The terrorist argument
doesn't make much sense - London must already be pretty high up on the list of
"attractive" terrorist targets based on all kinds of factors and I can't see
how a million or two more (or fewer) people is going to make much difference.

On the other hand, there's an excellent argument for creating infrastructure
outside London, it would be great to see a much stronger second city (or
metropolitan region) - this would be attractive to some businesses that may be
put off the capital by cost, relieve pressure on London, and be great for
people for a multitude of reasons.

Given how cheaply governments can borrow money right now, I don't understand
why they're not doing both, or why developed countries in general currently
spend so little on infrastructure.

~~~
sievebrain
It's not like the UK government isn't trying. The whole "Northern Powerhouse"
and such.

The basic problem is that people, by and large, want to live and work in
London rather than Manchester (which is I think the only credible competitor
to London for mega-city status right now).

Building Crossrail isn't something where you can just sort of pick and choose
where to drop it. London transport is horribly overcrowded already. If it
doesn't keep up with demand then it's not like everyone will just say, oh
well, we'll all just move en-masse to a different city. If that were going to
happen it'd have happened already. Instead they'll just keep packing in like
sardines and feel miserable.

The UK already borrows huge sums of money. It's only cheap because so many
countries have been or are printing money to fund public spending, which means
it's not really anywhere near as cheap as it looks.

~~~
barnabee
I agree with all of the above but would love to see the "Northern Powerhouse"
receive tens of billions (like London) rather than the tens of millions it
seems [1] to be getting so far.

[1] [http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/16/osborne-
budge...](http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/16/osborne-budget-
chancellor-northern-powerhouse-manchester)

