I’ve heard several aerospace afficionadoes say that the Concordes were never operated profitably, claims by British Airways notwithstanding.
I agree. I can see a number of cancer- and disease-fighting applications. They may even help us live longer, though I find virtual immortality unlikely.
That sounds like a fun way to travel. Pull the cord and BAM! your in Australia in seconds.
Wouldn’t be an issue if the tunnel istelf was a vaccuum.
The one thing that jumps out at me right away is how much it would suck to spend 7+ days driving through a tunnel. I mean, there’s no scenery; it’s just a tunnel. Who would want to sit through that?
Also, presumably people are going to have stop every once in a while to sleep. Would there be hotels, restaurants, etc in the tunnel?
Yes, but the food would be so-so.
Why would you build a road tunnel? It makes much more sense to run a high speed train, like they do for the Channel Tunnel. A modern high-speed train can cover the distance from London to New York in less than 20 hours.
True.
Of course, a 747 can do three trips in that time, without the expense of the tunnel.
But once the tunnel is built, the train will be far more energy-efficient than a 747.
Besides, the speed I quoted above is what’s achieved in conventional railways today. By the time a trans-Atlantic tunnel becomes a reality, there will undoubtedly be advances in train technology as well. As I said before, if air is pumped out of the tunnel there’s virtually no limit on speed.
Even if you can build a maglev train that goes as fast as a 747, you still won’t get to build the tunnel. Consider the cost/benefit factors. A trans-Atlantic tunnel would easily be the most expensive thing ever created in the history of mankind. You’re going to have to get investors to put up mind-boggling amounts of money. And what will you accomplish? You’ll build a tunnel that can compete with airliners. But…we already have airliners!
You’ll be spending skillions of dollars/euros/yen/etc to re-invent the wheel. If a trans-Atlantic tunnel is going to be economically viable, it will have to offer a huge, obvious, and undeniable advantage over airplanes and ships.
General Motors had a working prototype, but a professional assassin named Fransico Scaramanga stole it.
High speed trains are already competing well with airlines within the crowded continent of Europe; vac-trains will most likely arrive here or in Japan before elsewhere.
The main advantage of trains over airlines is that they run on electric power; when oil reserves get low, electric trains will run on electricity generated by solar power, fission or fusion.
Airlines in the post-oil world will have to run on fuel synthesised from biomass, using electricity in the process; wherever it is economical to do this, then yes, there will be airlines.
Medium haul travel, and cargo transport within landmasses, will be moved more efficiently by rail transport of some kind, it seems to me.
Correct. But since (barring some serious nanotech magic) the cost of such a tunnel would be approximately equal to all the money ever spent on transportation infrastructure, even the most optimistic forecast of efficiency may fall short of justifying the expense.
Maybe. The major problem is the unpkeep on the line - a small leak somewhere can ruin it. I can see it happening but we’ll need new constructon techniques to work with it.
Actually, its likely we’ll have fusion-powered orbital hoppers by the time we run out of oil. The idea is fairly simple.
There actually are some real, but rare cars like Scaramanga’s. I saw a picture of some hobbyists who rebuil a Honda into a flying car. It could drive normally r they could strap-on wings.
The Diamond Age, by Neal Stephenson? 
There are tracks running along Exposition, a block from where I lived on Clarington. I might have seen a train on them in the '80s, but I don’t remember. I do remember the tracks crossing Westwood, which have now been pulled up. How must it have been to have a train running from downtown to Santa Monica?
The automobile companies actually did feasibility studies for flying cars many years ago. They came to the conclusion that such vehicles would be insanely dangerous to operate, and too much of a hazard to the people on the ground. I’d have to agree; imagine some guy flying home on saturday night after a few hours at the bar, or a little old lady who can barely see over the control panel, or a mom who’s trying to fly while at the same time trying to swat her bratty kids in the back seat, or all the other boneheaded things we do in our cars taking place ten thousand feet in the air. :eek: