(UK) The National Grid has created a redesigned, low-profile pylon to replace the traditional steel

[LVL FACTORY]

[QUOTE=adam1172;46063819]They better make it white so that it looks all futuristic and shit.

Galvanized steel is soo last millennia.[/QUOTE]

Oh hell no things done in that style look so ugly and cringy

[Terminutter]

[QUOTE=Thomo_UK;46058828]Pylons are one of those things I don't even notice anymore until someone mentions them.

I like the current design though, maybe it's just me.[/QUOTE]

Not sure if it's the correct word, but aren't the current ones a bit brutalist? I like the design of them to be honest. The new one is pretty awesome, but the old one has something stark and functional about it I like.

[Mingebox]

[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;46063267]No, not really.[/QUOTE]
Clearly Hidole555 has failed us.

[Sableye]

[QUOTE=Teddypimm;46058903]I don't know much about architecture but I wish there was a cross-sectional view of both pylons extending below the ground.

It's just the new design seems less stable than the current one, higher center of gravity, and a smaller base, so it would be interesting how they've made it stable while reducing the profile of it.[/QUOTE]

looks like they repurposed a wind turbine pylon, in which case it's probably built exactly like a wind turbine and is bolted to the ground, having a massive concrete block to rest on

[editline]24th September 2014[/editline]

it also would make sense economically since you can pick those up relatively cheap since the prices have fallen due to mass production

[Hidole555]

[QUOTE=Mingebox;46064701]Clearly Hidole555 has failed us.[/QUOTE]

Well shit. I'm gonna go crawl into the shame corner now.

[smurfy]

BTW National Grid plc is a private company so I don't think this even came out of the government budget.

[spaceghost]

Why not run them underground? It's more expensive, but no risk of wind/other disasters destroying a mass amount of them.

[smurfy]

[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;46071110]Why not run them underground? It's more expensive, but no risk of wind/other disasters destroying a mass amount of them.[/QUOTE]

REALLY fucking expensive

[url]http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/jan/31/burying-electric-pylons-cheaper-government[/url]
[quote]When costs are calculated over 40 years, overhead cables were found to cost between £2.2m/km and £4.2m/ km to install and maintain, compared with between £10.2m/km and £24m/km for those buried. Costs varied according to the technology used and the voltage of the lines.[/quote]

[editline]25th September 2014[/editline]

The source link in the OP actually mentions the underground option

[quote]Going underground is the most requested solution, but this is an option that brings with it vastly increased costs. For example, at the voltages and capacity required by many of the new lines we need to build, the cost of going underground is typically £16 million per kilometre dearer than overhead cables. Of course, all of these are extra costs that would ultimately find their way through to customers’ bills.

But we are listening, and as part of our consultation we do propose underground cables in certain areas. For the Hinkley Point route, nearly five miles are proposed to be underground through the Mendip Hills, an area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. We are also currently considering what pylon design should be used in various locations along the rest of the route.[/quote]

[TCWilliamson]

I rather like the old design, HV insulators look awesome!