Possibly the start of the end of aviation?

Sponsored Links
Norcon said:
If it was bombed by radical islamists what countries should we bomb and devastate in retaliation "shock and awe" style?
Click to expand...

Luton, Leicester, Rochdale and probably most of Dewsbury should be bombed in retaliation (ooh and the house where Anjem Choudhary lives) (as long as he's in at the time) ;) ;)
 
Norcon said:
If the chunnel was bombed would it flood?

Lets say a ton of semtex exploded in the middle.
Would the sides rupture outwards or would everything inside the tunnel just be expelled like a giant bazooka?

I could see it being every bit as devastating as the attack on the twin towers.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the pressure wave would travel along the tunnel in both directions, but I'd be very surprised if the walls were not breached as well and the tunnel flood.

Personally, I think the safest form of transport is walking, provided that you think carefully where you walk!
 
Sponsored Links
Dextraneous said:
Factoring in the elimination of checking in and and baggage reclamation.
Click to expand...

What makes you think you don't have to check in and go through baggage checks?

Check in and security searches are standard on most of the high speed stuff
 
For an explosion in the Channel tunnel to allow sea water to enter, it would have to explode through the tunnel walls and about 40 -60 metres of rock above. So I doubt very much whether the channel tunnel could be flooded by a bomb. ;)
 
jockscott said:
For an explosion in the Channel tunnel to allow sea water to enter, it would have to explode through the tunnel walls and about 40 -60 metres of rock above. So I doubt very much whether the channel tunnel could be flooded by a bomb. ;)
Click to expand...

I admit that I hadn't realised it was so deep.
 
If it cracked the liner it would be shut for months and who would go through it again? It would probably be uneconomic to repair.
 
If it created a seismic shift in the surrounding rock then it might be unstable for ever.
 
Even if it didn't - terror causes fear. Fear stops people traveling through it. No point running it without passengers.
 
joe-90 said:
Even if it didn't - terror causes fear. Fear stops people traveling through it. No point running it without passengers.
Click to expand...

Yep, gazillions of people refuse to fly after 9/11, yet you don't see many airlines going bust do ya ? ;) ;)
 
Dextraneous said:
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/japans-maglev-train-breaks-world-speed-record-122534223.html#TdpwIyx

Travelling at 350+mph. more comfortable than planes, possibly more fuel efficient. Less prone to terrorist hijacks?

Factoring in the elimination of checking in and and baggage reclamation, it could be that for overland journeys this may well (and ought?) to be the way to go.

Flying overseas will still be necessary though.
Click to expand...

I love the idea of Maglev, but the capital costs are huge. Added to that, the impact of such high speeds on the local environment are significent. A high speed train running at full speed is one thing, but a Maglev running at 300mph is a different issue. In the densily populated UK, you just couldn't do this, let alone get such speeds anywhere near urban areas.

Even in China, the long Maglev lines often don't even get into central city areas, so they are a bit like airine networks, in that they get people near a city, whereas regular trains will get you to the heart of the city.

But things may one day change.... they may get construction costs down, they may sort out the optimum speed that a train can go, they may get a Maglev to go to the heart of a city. But these are things that are decades away from being widespread.

But this and high speed trains can only really compete on a limited range. Too short, and its not worth it, so you need local trains. Too far, and you really need planes (would you want to spend 2 days on a bullet train to get to China, instead of under a day in a plane?).

Its the middle range, where short haul flights operate that HSTs and Maglevs could compete, and where they can reduce environmental impacts.

We just need to look at Europe (especially France), where they have built HST lines and reduced short haul flights as a result.

China's proposals to build HSTs to the US, and Europe are a tad ambitious. As is Musk's Hyperloop.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...scussions-high-speed-beijing-american-railway
http://www.budgettravel.com/blog/china-to-build-high-speed-rail-link-to-europe,11163/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top