 |
16 miles of hole - call NASA
Author: Bob
Date: 10-26-2015 - 16:04
"Assuming TBMs started at both ends and advanced at 20 feet a day for 261 days a year, the tunnel would take seven years to complete — finishing in 2026. At an advance rate of 10 feet a day, the time would double to 14 years."
May 25, 1961 - July 20, 1969 = MAN ON THE MOON ...
...and it takes November 4, 2008 to ____ 2026(at best) to dig a hole on Earth ???
BOB2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph seems to have an interesting spin. I agree
> that there is some very real cognitive disconnect
> at PB among some folks I know. If they continue
> to listen to the primary idiot at the MTA and keep
> proposing really costly and stupid alternatives,
> then this is a likely outcome. It's not necessary
> to build this much tunnel under Saugus Mountain,
> or the Tehachipi's, but there is no adult
> supervision at CHSRA, there never was, even under
> previous management teams.
>
> Then, of course, we have the usual spin by those
> who find these things to be inherently impossible,
> in their opinions. Which, as usual, is clearly
> based upon their advanced degree's in engineering.
> Some folks find everything impossible, since
> everything part of the vast conspiracy, and if we
> listened to them, we would probably still be
> living in the caves, as it would be too risky to
> go out.
>
> Too bad about all of those miles and miles of
> tunnels we already have through these very same
> mountains and earthquake faults bringing things
> like water. And isn't it true that modern
> engineering is too stupid to do things like.
> Therefore, the new tunnel in Switzerland must not
> be real due to the difficulty of going through the
> Alps, with all of those earthquake faults,
> either?
>
> I am still celebrating the small OCTA victory for
> taxpayers, travelers, and fiscal sanity in meeting
> real travel needs in the rethink of the LA
> Anaheim.. I expect more of the same kind of
> "refinements" here, too. It won't be built at
> all, otherwise.
>
> Some folks do apparently know better, and maybe,
> that is why some of this was "leaked" by some of
> those same "disgruntled" engineers who do know
> better, and yet, still would like to build a cost
> effective system, which actually meets our real
> travel needs?
May 25, 1961 - July 20, 1969 = MAN ON THE MOON ...
...and it takes November 4, 2008 to ____ 2026(at best) to dig a hole on Earth ???
BOB2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ralph seems to have an interesting spin. I agree
> that there is some very real cognitive disconnect
> at PB among some folks I know. If they continue
> to listen to the primary idiot at the MTA and keep
> proposing really costly and stupid alternatives,
> then this is a likely outcome. It's not necessary
> to build this much tunnel under Saugus Mountain,
> or the Tehachipi's, but there is no adult
> supervision at CHSRA, there never was, even under
> previous management teams.
>
> Then, of course, we have the usual spin by those
> who find these things to be inherently impossible,
> in their opinions. Which, as usual, is clearly
> based upon their advanced degree's in engineering.
> Some folks find everything impossible, since
> everything part of the vast conspiracy, and if we
> listened to them, we would probably still be
> living in the caves, as it would be too risky to
> go out.
>
> Too bad about all of those miles and miles of
> tunnels we already have through these very same
> mountains and earthquake faults bringing things
> like water. And isn't it true that modern
> engineering is too stupid to do things like.
> Therefore, the new tunnel in Switzerland must not
> be real due to the difficulty of going through the
> Alps, with all of those earthquake faults,
> either?
>
> I am still celebrating the small OCTA victory for
> taxpayers, travelers, and fiscal sanity in meeting
> real travel needs in the rethink of the LA
> Anaheim.. I expect more of the same kind of
> "refinements" here, too. It won't be built at
> all, otherwise.
>
> Some folks do apparently know better, and maybe,
> that is why some of this was "leaked" by some of
> those same "disgruntled" engineers who do know
> better, and yet, still would like to build a cost
> effective system, which actually meets our real
> travel needs?
