A train ride from New York to London the long way around sounds amazing. I don't really like to travel, but I would totally do that.
On a somewhat related note: My girlfriend falls asleep on any trip longer than half an hour and doesn't wake up until we get there. I think this train would put her in a coma.
[QUOTE=MightyMax;31925359]yah but amtrack sucks something horrid.[/QUOTE]
The last time I went on Amtrak, Someone was in the tiny bathrooms they have on the train, and the train turned causing him to fall backwards, against the door, and out onto the floor of the train, still pissing everywhere.
We were going from Dallas to El Paso, and the train smelled like piss the entire time because of that. :v:
I'll stick to driving or flying.
[editline]25th August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mbbird;31924928]Yeah I can't honestly see the point. The amount of money it would cost someone to get from any non-Alaskan North American state/province to anywhere of any interest (aka not Siberia) in Russia or any other part of Asia for that matter would be about the same as a plane ticket, and a plane would be [I]infinitely[/I] faster.[/QUOTE]
Except this is more about transporting freight between the two countries than people.
[editline]25th August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=viperfan7;31928251]now if this was some day converted to a high speed rail system, that would be great[/QUOTE]
It is a high speed rail line.
[quote]It would create a high-speed railway line, energy links and a fibreoptic cable network.[/quote]
I don't know what they plan to do about the fact that Russia and the United States use different gauge rails though.
going from toronto to russia a reality?? I would so do that
[QUOTE=Jelly;31925736]April 20, 2007
Late as fuck man.[/QUOTE]
So like...did this plan ever get set into motion, then?
Slap in a bullet train and it will be all good.
[QUOTE=Smoot;31929772]Guys this wouldn't make sense for passenger rail, [B]however,[/B] this would be a godsend for freight.[/QUOTE]This one knows what he is talking about. Freight trasport via rail is a lot cheaper and uses less fuel than marine freight. You don't have to travel halfway across the world during winter, either.
Anyways, this would provide a great incentive to improve rail in the United States and Canada.
[QUOTE=Dark-Energy;31924948]So if they installed fiber optic lines through the tunnel, would that technically mean a better ping when connecting to Russian servers? Or Japan? Assuming they lease a portion of the lines to north american ISPs[/QUOTE]
World internet cables:
[img]http://gttpl.com/leased/images/cable-capacity.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=smurfy;31927139]Even if people did want to use it, that would mean they would each have to invest massively in building new highways and probably even new cities on both sides of the tunnel[/QUOTE]
The main selling point behind this is this is going to be shitloads less expensive and 5 times faster to transport goods from China to America using this instead of ships as we do today
[editline]25th August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Morcam;31928384]Yeah, trains are just far too slow for this to be truly useful. It would take days, and no one wants to travel for multiple days when they could just fly. Meanwhile, freight can be shipped by sea quite efficiently as it is.[/QUOTE]
Most trains travel about 100 km/h where as most ships can barely hit 20 km/h, with this making Russia 7 billion dollars a year if they build it
[editline]25th August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=kaine123;31928724]Nope, there are thousands of rail systems connecting every major city and trade center.[/QUOTE]
He said Passenger rail
Also AmTrak is staffed by a bunch of dickheads who don't know shit about Texas since they always ignore the Texas Triangle in every plan they create
Hell fucking Clinton's high speed rail had Dallas and Houston completely disconnected with the Houston-San Antonio line going into swamps in the deep south and Dallas' line going into buttfuck Oklahoma
I could take the train from Oslo to New York.
It's said to be completed in 35 years if they go through with it.
I prefer the idea of a bridge though. And I mean, there are all ready many bridges longer then the Alaska-Russia gap there. Like the 168 kilomiter long one in China.
[QUOTE=Morcam;31928384]Yeah, trains are just far too slow for this to be truly useful. It would take days, and no one wants to travel for multiple days when they could just fly. Meanwhile, freight can be shipped by sea quite efficiently as it is.
At one point a few years ago, my parents decided to try going from central Indiana to Virginia by train. Turns out it would have saved them 5$. In return, they had to travel for two days each way (Get to city, all the northbound/southbound trains have left for the day). That cut the vacation from 7 days to 3 days. For 5$. No thanks.[/QUOTE]
From what I have heard it sounds like the reason the transport was that bad is because of the poor quality of American Railways. Whenever I go to London from Edinburgh I always prefer car over plane as whilst the Plane is twice as fast, its more comfortable and cheaper in a train. (As in I can plug my laptop in and have room for my legs whilst the noise levels are nicely low and I am free to walk about)
Sea freighters are good for moving things I give you that, but it becomes a problem when you realise that its difficult to sail on land in a freighter to say the least, also whilst locomotives move less at a time than ships it moves them faster and with less fuel use.
Honestly the best method of transport overland is the railway for nearly all cases.
[QUOTE=Noz;31925013]That's impossible.[/QUOTE]
You want impossible? try telling that to the guys who build the Suez canal and the panama canal.
Now What we need is an Atlantic bridge that connect Canada to Greenland
[QUOTE=BCell;31935793]You want impossible? try telling that to the guys who build the Suez canal and the panama canal.[/QUOTE]
In my opinion, the Hoover Dam is the most impressive modern creation, more impressive then the spaceship that brought us to the moon.
You should read it's history, mind numbing stuff.
I thought that alaska was a part of russia
[editline]25th August 2011[/editline]
a+ geography
[QUOTE=mac338;31935970]In my opinion, the Hoover Dam is the most impressive modern creation, more impressive then the spaceship that brought us to the moon.
You should read it's history, mind numbing stuff.[/QUOTE]
If the Hoover dam is the best of the 20th century, the Pacific railroad was the greatest of the 19th.
[QUOTE=Osku1234;31936162]I thought that alaska was a part of russia
[editline]25th August 2011[/editline]
a+ geography[/QUOTE]
It actually used to be for several centuries, till it sold it to America. I think the Soviet Union even tried getting it back at some point.
This would be brilliant for freight.
They could also have an offshoot to China.
Alaska should be a part of Canada, not USA, in my opinion.
Woah so now I could drive from my house, go through the channel tunnel, drive through Europe, drive through Russia, drive through Alaska and finally visit Canada.
Ha take that expensive airlines.
[QUOTE=mac338;31936275]Alaska should be a part of Canada, not USA, in my opinion.[/QUOTE]
To compensate the American border with Canada then be moved to the 54.4 parallel.
[QUOTE=mac338;31936275]Alaska should be a part of Canada, not USA, in my opinion.[/QUOTE]
[i]wat[/i]
They bought the land, and they applied for statehood. It ain't going to be kanadian.
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;31937359][i]wat[/i]
They bought the land, and they applied for statehood. It ain't going to be kanadian.[/QUOTE]
Bah, as a person with geographical OCD I am no fan.
Besides, Palin
[QUOTE=FunnyBunny;31924751]I've always wanted this to happen. It means we can go practically anywhere in the world by land (except Australia)[/QUOTE]
That's good, otherwise the world would be overrun with deadly animals.
[QUOTE=mac338;31938314]Bah, as a person with geographical OCD I am no fan.
Besides, Palin[/QUOTE]I don't think Canada wants Palin.
[QUOTE=mac338;31935580]I could take the train from Oslo to New York.
It's said to be completed in 35 years if they go through with it.
I prefer the idea of a bridge though. And I mean, there are all ready many bridges longer then the Alaska-Russia gap there. Like the 168 kilomiter long one in China.[/QUOTE]
There are a lot of problems with building a bridge. Mostly because of the extreme weather.
Ice flows would put a lot of stress on the bridge supports, and the extreme cold can weaken steel.
The entire thing would have to be enclosed too, or only operate a few months every year.
[QUOTE=jeimizu;31939702]There are a lot of problems with building a bridge. Mostly because of the extreme weather.
Ice flows would put a lot of stress on the bridge supports, and the extreme cold can weaken steel.
The entire thing would have to be enclosed too, or only operate a few months every year.[/QUOTE]
Easy solution, make the bridge underground where it can be heated and protected from wind. Much better idea when a stupid tunnel.
This would really benefit markets.
So I could get on a train at Warblington station (a short distance from where I live) and without leaving a train or station get to say, New York? Awesome.
I don't know if this would *quite* affect an underground tunnel, but isn't the Bering Sea rough as hell? I just can't really see how construction could be done. That's like trying to have sex while attempting to ride a rodeo bull.
At least if it gets completed, though, it's pretty straightforward to keep it heated properly. I just have a feeling the conditions would make it next to impossible to accomplish anything.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.