NumberTwelve From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 1431 posts, RR: 10 Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1500 times:
No chance, I guess/hope.
Maybe it's possible technically but there are lots of safety regulations and issues , f.e. how to put out the people if something happens in the tunnel (water, fire, etc).
Safetyregulations in lots of countries want to see evacuation plans.
DAL767400ER From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 5721 posts, RR: 50 Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1475 times:
Seen a documentary about that idea on Discovery once. Don't remember any exact numbers, but such a tunnel could cost several trillion dollars, essentially flowing in the sea and haing a train that would go Mach 7. And don't even ask for the billions of cubic meters of concrete needed. It's not gonna happen. It's a technical nightmare to construct and financially unacceptable. Hell, a bridge from Scotland via Iceland and Greenland to Canada would likely be more realistic.
Sacflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 371 posts, RR: 3 Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1473 times:
Yeah, like an airplane cabin isn't claustrophic enough?
This seems like a wild idea that would come during the 1800's when trains became faster than oceanliners and no one could have imagined the ability to hop over the ocean at 600 mph.
I'm just happy that RR ratings can't be in negative numbers!
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13343 posts, RR: 64 Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1468 times:
It would be crossing an underwater mountain range which is about twice as high as the Alps and is at the same time one of the most geologically active zones on the earth. I don´t see it happen.
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 22 Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1336 times:
It would could take 40+ years to construct and several TRILLION (xx,000,000,000,000) in today's costs, forget inflation, forget going to Mars, etc.
For circa 2005, I'm gonna say hype. Technically anything can be built with enough investment and belief in the project, but in this case they'd have to be crazy. Unless those investors are able to conivince any government affected by such a route to help fund such a project, it is not going to go beyond a simulation. I guaranetee and airline or aircraft company will lobby against such a project is they had enough influence within their respective governments.
That said, noting the size of the Atlantic, IMO, 600mph is not enough. We might as well spare no expense and have it be supersonic or better in a partial vaccum tube. Now that is crazy, why? Imagine how long it would take to evacuate even 90% of the air from a tube 30 feet wide and 15 million feet long...unless it were in sections with multiple pumps, while the tunnel is being built.
Operation would be like moving through a canal, except the route is one giant channel lock. After the train is boarded, it moves into a sealed chamber that depressurizes and a door opens in front and the sucker takeoff. As it approaches the other end it slows into another chamber that resets the pressure such that the train enters ambient pressure to begin unloading.
The micro pressure of the tunnel may allow a maglev to be powered by a two rocket motors with one at each engine, dual purpose and no fuel spent in between, or at least minimal. I think most of the time spent will be in the pressure differential chambers. To be efficient, all electrical power should come from geothermal stations below each tunnel break connected to the seafloor. Yeah, I'm having fun with this thread, been bored all summer break so far.
I'm guessing total time for a round trip being on the order of 4-5 hours for a train of length 1 kilometer with 2500 people aboard. Engines may require two space-shuttle-type-rockets to burn for 10 minutes to accelerate to a groundspeed eqivalent of M3. If the reverse engines do not fire I think for emergency the train will land on tracks and use its own knetic energy to power electro magnetic brakes for an emergency stop. Will it be enough? I donno, I haven't done the math yet, ya'll read pure brain barf.
Hold on, lemme do it up'n I'll get back to ya.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
WhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1300 times:
The technology isn't too advanced, but the cost kills it. I'd much rather see Governments stop looking downwards and start funding stuff like the proposed Space Elevator.
One day we need to be able to get off this rock. Getting off it is more important than moving about on it.
Planespotterx From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 1298 times:
Instead of building a tunnel as "one", why not have it in sections, ie from Portugal to Azores, Azores to Bermuda then to the US.
Also was the Gibraltar straights bridge also deemed as economically impossible?
Airboeing From France, joined Apr 2005, 223 posts, RR: 4 Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1280 times:
What a big joke !!
-> The "pilot" says that to be able to "drive" such a train one need an 8-years training....Absurd !
-> The interview of "Sophie" : she says that she'll realise her dream : teaching english to the passengers during the trip... Absurd !
-> "François" talks about the 1st Class passengers who will have a massage-room, casino, pool, golf practice... doesn't that remind you something ?
Anymway,
Quoting Klaus (Reply 2): Purely a topic of science fiction
this is the kind of statments people made a few centuries ago talking about flying....
RJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1270 times:
It would be more feasible to go via the UK, Faroe Islands, Iceland - where you can hop over the mid Atlantic ridge without trouble, across Greenland, then to Canada and down.
The longest tunnel would only be 200 miles long and 1,000 meters deep. Which is still a ridiculous idea.
The only scientifically (not financially) feasible way to connect Paris with New York is by going across Europe, through Russia, under the Bering Strait and down to New York.
And that would take about a 4 days to complete, so you might as well get a boat.
LH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 55 Reply 20, posted (8 years 16 hours ago) and read 1148 times:
Well considering North America and Europe are getting centimetres farther away from each other each year, unless they plan on continously adding to the tunnel there's no way this could work.
LH423
« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
FlyAUA From Austria, joined May 2005, 4604 posts, RR: 57 Reply 25, posted (7 years 12 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1058 times:
I saw a documentary about this on discovery about 2 years ago. The idea was a suspended tunnel held down by cables... as some have mentioned. It's just a myth and probably always will be. Too many complications involved like tunnel withstanding the pressure, speed of the train, ships destroying the tunnel... etc...
Sponsor Message: 
From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 6495 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Feb 2007, 77 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 20860 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 371 posts, 
From France, joined Mar 2002, 4885 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 787 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 1352 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2477 posts, 
From Austria, joined May 2005, 4604 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
