I'll believe it when I see it! :D
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/05/09/china-may-build-an-undersea-train-to-america/?tid=pm_pop
Quote
China may build an undersea train to America
By Ishaan Tharoor
May 9 at 8:01 pm
China is planning to build a train line that would, in theory, connect Beijing to the United States. According to a report in the Beijing Times, citing an expert at the Chinese Academy of Engineering, Chinese officials are considering a route that would start in the country's northeast, thread through eastern Siberia and cross the Bering Strait via a 125-mile long underwater tunnel into Alaska.
"Right now we're already in discussions. Russia has already been thinking about this for many years," says Wang Mengshu, the engineer cited in the article. The proposed "China-Russia-Canada-America" line would be some 8,000 miles long, 1,800 miles longer than the Trans-Siberian railroad. The tunnel that the Chinese would help bore beneath the icy seas would be four times the length of what traverses the English Channel.
That's reason enough to be skeptical of the project, of which there are few details beyond what was attributed to the one official cited by the state-run Beijing Times. Meanwhile, a report in the state-run China Daily insists the country does have the technology and means to complete a construction project of this scale, including another tunnel that would link the Chinese province of Fujian with nearby Taiwan.
In the past half decade or so, China has embarked on an astonishing rail construction spree, laying down tens of thousands of miles tracks and launching myriad high-speed lines. It has signaled its intent to build a "New Silk Road" -- a heavy-duty freight network through Central Asia that would connect with Europe via rail rather than the old caravans that once bridged West and East. A map that appeared on Xinhua's news site outlines the route below, alongside a parallel vision for a "maritime Silk Road."
While some of its neighbors watch China's rise warily, the main plank of Beijing's soft power pitch has always been its stated desire to improve economic ties and trade with virtually everyone. "China's wisdom for building an open world economy and open international relations is being drawn on more and more each day," trumpets the Xinhua report that accompanies the map above, according to the Diplomat.
To that end, Beijing has assiduously resurrected the narrative of the ancient Silk Road as well as given prime billing to the tales of China's famed Ming dynasty treasure fleets, which sailed all across the Indian Ocean. Seen in such grand historic perspective, a tunnel to Alaska doesn't seem too far-fetched.
That's just silly.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 11, 2014, 09:08:20 AM
Quote
Seen in such grand historic perspective, a tunnel to Alaska doesn't seem too far-fetched.
That is just stupid. Neither the Silk Road nor the Ming fleets required a technological leap or the commitment of such vast resources as to strain the home economy. Timmay fucks up once again.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 11, 2014, 09:08:20 AM
I'll believe it when I see it! :D
...
It'll happen before HS2 gets built. :bowler:(nimby)
It's perfectly possible engineering wise but has very little economic case at all.
Particularly annoying are those people who are fond of a Bering crossing as they think it would make it easier for them to travel to Asia :lol:
A tunnel from nowhere to nowhere. I may be wrong here, but I was under the impression that the English Channel Tunnel has been an economic failure.
Quote from: grumbler on May 11, 2014, 09:38:25 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 11, 2014, 09:08:20 AM
Quote
Seen in such grand historic perspective, a tunnel to Alaska doesn't seem too far-fetched.
That is just stupid. Neither the Silk Road nor the Ming fleets required a technological leap or the commitment of such vast resources as to strain the home economy. Timmay fucks up once again.
Did I somehow imply that I thought this was possible? :huh:
What economic problem is being solved with this?
Quote from: Razgovory on May 11, 2014, 11:09:42 PM
A tunnel from nowhere to nowhere. I may be wrong here, but I was under the impression that the English Channel Tunnel has been an economic failure.
In the beginning yes, since Maggie would not allow any public monies to fund it so they had to rely too much on banks and stock markets. Not anymore, following restructuring with small shareholders getting their savings wiped out.
Some over optimistic forecasting and rising security issues did not help as well.
Quote from: DGuller on May 12, 2014, 12:02:06 AM
What economic problem is being solved with this?
Too many notes.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 11, 2014, 11:32:32 PM
Did I somehow imply that I thought this was possible? :huh:
You
started the thread. :huh:
Not even you are silly enough to start a new thread every time someone mentions something that is impossible.
Why not start a TIMMAY'S SILLY MEGATHREAD and post all of your thread ideas of this kind there?
Quote from: grumbler on May 12, 2014, 06:23:50 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 11, 2014, 11:32:32 PM
Did I somehow imply that I thought this was possible? :huh:
You started the thread. :huh:
Not even you are silly enough to start a new thread every time someone mentions something that is impossible.
Why not start a TIMMAY'S SILLY MEGATHREAD and post all of your thread ideas of this kind there?
:huh:
No, making fun of the Chinese is one of the cornerstone of Languish membership down.
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 12, 2014, 07:35:02 AM
:huh:
No, making fun of the Chinese is one of the cornerstone of Languish membership down.
:huh: This isn't making fun of the Chinese. There isn't anything to this story; it is a report that an engineer in some institute says that some un-named officials may or may not be thinking about a project that may or may not involve a rail link to the US.
I don't believe that even
you think this is enough to bash the Chinese on. Let's stick to what they are actually doing (like deliberately colliding with ships from other countries, or invading US territory, or the like). No need to make stuff up.
GRUMBLER MEGATHREAD
:rolleyes: Old idea.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fthumb%2Fe%2Fef%2FBattle_Beneath_the_Earth_OS.jpg%2F220px-Battle_Beneath_the_Earth_OS.jpg&hash=27069e82df37a1242d04d3ce58044ca35001188c)
QuoteThe plot involves rogue elements of the communist Chinese army who use fantastic burrowing machines in an effort to place atomic bombs under major U.S. cities. The U.S. Navy sends troops underground to combat them. The film has been described as "deliriously paranoid"
SOLD.
Quote from: Ideologue on May 12, 2014, 09:31:35 AM
QuoteThe plot involves rogue elements of the communist Chinese army who use fantastic burrowing machines in an effort to place atomic bombs under major U.S. cities. The U.S. Navy sends troops underground to combat them. The film has been described as "deliriously paranoid"
SOLD.
Brilliant film, from the twilight if the Era of Casting White People in Chinese Roles.
Quote from: derspiess on May 12, 2014, 09:42:46 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on May 12, 2014, 09:31:35 AM
QuoteThe plot involves rogue elements of the communist Chinese army who use fantastic burrowing machines in an effort to place atomic bombs under major U.S. cities. The U.S. Navy sends troops underground to combat them. The film has been described as "deliriously paranoid"
SOLD.
Brilliant film, from the twilight if the Era of Casting White People in Chinese Roles.
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/2291xk/the-jeselnik-offensive-which-kind-of-asian-is-this-
NSFW
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on May 12, 2014, 02:26:40 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 11, 2014, 11:09:42 PM
A tunnel from nowhere to nowhere. I may be wrong here, but I was under the impression that the English Channel Tunnel has been an economic failure.
In the beginning yes, since Maggie would not allow any public monies to fund it so they had to rely too much on banks and stock markets. Not anymore, following restructuring with small shareholders getting their savings wiped out.
Some over optimistic forecasting and rising security issues did not help as well.
Did it ever actually break even? Has the money gained actually equaled the money spent both private and public?
Quote from: derspiess on May 12, 2014, 08:58:17 AM
:rolleyes: Old idea.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fthumb%2Fe%2Fef%2FBattle_Beneath_the_Earth_OS.jpg%2F220px-Battle_Beneath_the_Earth_OS.jpg&hash=27069e82df37a1242d04d3ce58044ca35001188c)
:lol: I was trying to think of the title of that movie.
Quote from: Razgovory on May 12, 2014, 11:34:08 AM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on May 12, 2014, 02:26:40 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 11, 2014, 11:09:42 PM
A tunnel from nowhere to nowhere. I may be wrong here, but I was under the impression that the English Channel Tunnel has been an economic failure.
In the beginning yes, since Maggie would not allow any public monies to fund it so they had to rely too much on banks and stock markets. Not anymore, following restructuring with small shareholders getting their savings wiped out.
Some over optimistic forecasting and rising security issues did not help as well.
Did it ever actually break even? Has the money gained actually equaled the money spent both private and public?
Tunnel opened for business in 1994. First profits made in 2007, much longer than expected indeed.
No public money was spent as I said. 100 million euro benefit in 2013 and they are on a buying spree (ferries freight services).
Of course, the tunnel cost like 12.5 billion euros so your severe criteria are not met. I still think it was worth it, not only for denying the island status of Britain. :)
Quote from: BragancaI still think it was worth it, not only for denying the island status of Britain.
I feel the Heer might be in for a surprise when they try to invade through the Chunnel.
This little tunnel is no big deal. I'll be impressed when they build a train tunnel from mainland China to the US west coast. Now that there will be a tunnel!! Call it the ChUSel! China US tunnel! ;)
Quote from: Ideologue on May 12, 2014, 01:29:55 PM
Quote from: BragancaI still think it was worth it, not only for denying the island status of Britain.
I feel the Heer might be in for a surprise when they try to invade through the Chunnel.
All 5 of them.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 12, 2014, 09:44:52 AM
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/2291xk/the-jeselnik-offensive-which-kind-of-asian-is-this-
NSFW
Actually pretty safe for my workplace.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on May 12, 2014, 12:45:07 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 12, 2014, 11:34:08 AM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on May 12, 2014, 02:26:40 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 11, 2014, 11:09:42 PM
A tunnel from nowhere to nowhere. I may be wrong here, but I was under the impression that the English Channel Tunnel has been an economic failure.
In the beginning yes, since Maggie would not allow any public monies to fund it so they had to rely too much on banks and stock markets. Not anymore, following restructuring with small shareholders getting their savings wiped out.
Some over optimistic forecasting and rising security issues did not help as well.
Did it ever actually break even? Has the money gained actually equaled the money spent both private and public?
Tunnel opened for business in 1994. First profits made in 2007, much longer than expected indeed.
No public money was spent as I said. 100 million euro benefit in 2013 and they are on a buying spree (ferries freight services).
Of course, the tunnel cost like 12.5 billion euros so your severe criteria are not met. I still think it was worth it, not only for denying the island status of Britain. :)
No public money was spent? I was under the impression there were subsidies, and I don't think breaking even is a severe criteria. So it's been in operation for 20 years and still hasn't even broken even? That doesn't sound like a success.
The interstate highway system has been operating for decades on a substantial loss. :(
Quote from: Razgovory on May 12, 2014, 10:47:57 PM
No public money was spent? I was under the impression there were subsidies, and I don't think breaking even is a severe criteria. So it's been in operation for 20 years and still hasn't even broken even? That doesn't sound like a success.
Your severe criteria as in "the money gained equaled the money spent both private and public" (sic). How much do you value Britain being linked to the mainland for trains and cars with storms in the Channel no longer isolating Britain from the Continent?
Your impression is just an impression as The tunnel was financed partly from investment by shareholders and partly from £8bn of debt.
QuoteNo government money was invested in the building of the tunnel,
http://web.archive.org/web/20101123153410/http://www.eurotunnel.com/ukcP3Main/ukcCorporate/ukcTunnelInfrastructure/ukcDevelopment/ukpHistory (http://web.archive.org/web/20101123153410/http://www.eurotunnel.com/ukcP3Main/ukcCorporate/ukcTunnelInfrastructure/ukcDevelopment/ukpHistory)
That's from a not so recent criticism of the tunnel.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on May 13, 2014, 12:00:09 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 12, 2014, 10:47:57 PM
No public money was spent? I was under the impression there were subsidies, and I don't think breaking even is a severe criteria. So it's been in operation for 20 years and still hasn't even broken even? That doesn't sound like a success.
Your severe criteria as in "the money gained equaled the money spent both private and public" (sic). How much do you value Britain being linked to the mainland for trains and cars with storms in the Channel no longer isolating the Continent from the Britain?
Your impression is just an impression as The tunnel was financed partly from investment by shareholders and partly from £8bn of debt.
QuoteNo government money was invested in the building of the tunnel,
http://web.archive.org/web/20101123153410/http://www.eurotunnel.com/ukcP3Main/ukcCorporate/ukcTunnelInfrastructure/ukcDevelopment/ukpHistory (http://web.archive.org/web/20101123153410/http://www.eurotunnel.com/ukcP3Main/ukcCorporate/ukcTunnelInfrastructure/ukcDevelopment/ukpHistory)
That's from a not so recent criticism of the tunnel.
FYP.
:yuk:
Quote from: mongers on May 13, 2014, 05:41:18 AM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on May 13, 2014, 12:00:09 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 12, 2014, 10:47:57 PM
No public money was spent? I was under the impression there were subsidies, and I don't think breaking even is a severe criteria. So it's been in operation for 20 years and still hasn't even broken even? That doesn't sound like a success.
Your severe criteria as in "the money gained equaled the money spent both private and public" (sic). How much do you value Britain being linked to the mainland for trains and cars with storms in the Channel no longer isolating the Continent from the Britain?
Your impression is just an impression as The tunnel was financed partly from investment by shareholders and partly from £8bn of debt.
QuoteNo government money was invested in the building of the tunnel,
http://web.archive.org/web/20101123153410/http://www.eurotunnel.com/ukcP3Main/ukcCorporate/ukcTunnelInfrastructure/ukcDevelopment/ukpHistory (http://web.archive.org/web/20101123153410/http://www.eurotunnel.com/ukcP3Main/ukcCorporate/ukcTunnelInfrastructure/ukcDevelopment/ukpHistory)
That's from a not so recent criticism of the tunnel.
FYP.
I had been waiting for the classic joke British joke to show up in this semi-hijack. Thanks Mongers! :)
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 11, 2014, 09:08:20 AM
Chinese officials are considering a route that would start in the country's northeast, thread through eastern Siberia and cross the Bering Strait via a 125-mile long underwater tunnel into Alaska.
Bah, the Israeli underwater route will go from Haifa to Miami.
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on May 13, 2014, 09:24:22 AM
Quote from: mongers on May 13, 2014, 05:41:18 AM
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on May 13, 2014, 12:00:09 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on May 12, 2014, 10:47:57 PM
No public money was spent? I was under the impression there were subsidies, and I don't think breaking even is a severe criteria. So it's been in operation for 20 years and still hasn't even broken even? That doesn't sound like a success.
Your severe criteria as in "the money gained equaled the money spent both private and public" (sic). How much do you value Britain being linked to the mainland for trains and cars with storms in the Channel no longer isolating the Continent from the Britain?
Your impression is just an impression as The tunnel was financed partly from investment by shareholders and partly from £8bn of debt.
QuoteNo government money was invested in the building of the tunnel,
http://web.archive.org/web/20101123153410/http://www.eurotunnel.com/ukcP3Main/ukcCorporate/ukcTunnelInfrastructure/ukcDevelopment/ukpHistory (http://web.archive.org/web/20101123153410/http://www.eurotunnel.com/ukcP3Main/ukcCorporate/ukcTunnelInfrastructure/ukcDevelopment/ukpHistory)
That's from a not so recent criticism of the tunnel.
FYP.
I had been waiting for the classic joke British joke to show up in this semi-hijack. Thanks Mongers! :)
:D
:cheers:
Quote from: Siege on May 14, 2014, 04:59:50 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on May 11, 2014, 09:08:20 AM
Chinese officials are considering a route that would start in the country's northeast, thread through eastern Siberia and cross the Bering Strait via a 125-mile long underwater tunnel into Alaska.
Bah, the Israeli underwater route will go from Haifa to Miami.
I guess the Sino-Israeli technological exchange is a two-lane street.
Quote from: Siege on May 14, 2014, 04:59:50 PM
Bah, the Israeli underwater route will go from Haifa to Miami.
You didn't get the word? It already does.