 |
Re: Altamont Press/Train Order/Etc Arguements About Reopening Lines
Author: OldPoleBurner
Date: 08-14-2013 - 14:44
This idea certainly ain't new. Many more years ago than I care to admit, Popular Science Magazine carried an article about an almost identical concept. Also the Science Channel and PBS's Nova have covered similar ideas over the years
The only difference I can see with those past ideas, was that previous theorists thought they would have to bore an arrow straight tunnel NY to LA, and somehow make it incredibly slippery; in order to minimize lateral forces and friction, enough to go 3000mph though a tube without burning up from the friction. In this latest version, it seems, they intend to remain above ground.
The older theorists thought they could not follow the curvature of the Earth at all, but instead had to follow the chord between those two points. They also had to suck out all the air from the tube to eliminate the air resistance, which is enormous in a tight tunnel; in order even go 1/10th that speed. Hell, the designers of the Concorde, had enormous problems with friction, at a mere mach 3 in the air 50,000 feet up. It would be several orders of magnitude worse in a tube or tunnel.
Of course, the obvious elephant in the room, that Popular Science never mentioned, was that even if all that could be made to work somehow, that tunnel would have to be 256 miles deep at its deepest. That's the farthest that such a 2800 mile chord would get from the circumference of the Earth. At that depth, any vehicle would melt from fervent heat, in minutes; not to mention the lining of the tunnel itself. Besides, magma can be found all over the place, much closer to the surface than that.
NOT even remotely practical, with any substance found on Earth.
But of late, we Americans sure do have an appetite for the absurd. Well that's OK - I guess - so long we remember its all in fun. Too bad some of have already lost sight of reality, in a number of other not so fun absurdities.
The only difference I can see with those past ideas, was that previous theorists thought they would have to bore an arrow straight tunnel NY to LA, and somehow make it incredibly slippery; in order to minimize lateral forces and friction, enough to go 3000mph though a tube without burning up from the friction. In this latest version, it seems, they intend to remain above ground.
The older theorists thought they could not follow the curvature of the Earth at all, but instead had to follow the chord between those two points. They also had to suck out all the air from the tube to eliminate the air resistance, which is enormous in a tight tunnel; in order even go 1/10th that speed. Hell, the designers of the Concorde, had enormous problems with friction, at a mere mach 3 in the air 50,000 feet up. It would be several orders of magnitude worse in a tube or tunnel.
Of course, the obvious elephant in the room, that Popular Science never mentioned, was that even if all that could be made to work somehow, that tunnel would have to be 256 miles deep at its deepest. That's the farthest that such a 2800 mile chord would get from the circumference of the Earth. At that depth, any vehicle would melt from fervent heat, in minutes; not to mention the lining of the tunnel itself. Besides, magma can be found all over the place, much closer to the surface than that.
NOT even remotely practical, with any substance found on Earth.
But of late, we Americans sure do have an appetite for the absurd. Well that's OK - I guess - so long we remember its all in fun. Too bad some of have already lost sight of reality, in a number of other not so fun absurdities.
