4 ms·
I gather that the intent is to tether the tunnel. I've seen how cables are run in tectonic-active areas: they are provided a certain elasticity and I imagine it
by marquis 14y ago
I gather that the intent is to tether the tunnel. I've seen how cables are run in tectonic-active areas: they are provided a certain elasticity and I imagine it would be similar. Earthquakes don't move much more than a few meters at a time (for a very very large event). How would this be any different than the Chunnel?
My own comment on this article:
"getting to, from and through airports is very time consuming"
I don't see how this would be any less time consuming. Security would be an equal nightmare - the only benefit would be that the citizens can utilize NYC/Londons existing transport infrastructure much like it's easier to get to the Chunnel departure station than it is to get to Gatwick.
- regularfry 14y agoThe Chunnel doesn't cross a fault line.
- marquis 14y agoPerhaps nothing considered imminently dangerous but they do exist nearby, and fault lines can spread given the right conditions: http://www.esri.com/news/arcwatch/0210/graphics/investigating1-lg.jpg http://www.esri.com/news/arcwatch/0210/graphics/investigatin...
- ralfd 14y agoOh, yes, security! Strange this isn't discussed more. While a bomb in an airplane is bad enough imagine what a ripped vacuum tube under the ocean will do! Such a tube will be a high profile target for terrorism and an incident/accident would block/destroy the whole traffic.