• Science

    Trans-Atlantic MagLev

    By Posted on 3.4.2008 20 Comments

    What: Submerged OCEANIC tunnel and supersonic train WHERE: New York London Cost: $88 billion $175 billion Crux: Neutrally buoyant vacuum tunnel submerged 150 to 300 feet beneath the Atlantic's surface and anchored to the seafloor, through which zips a magnetically levitated train at up to 4,000 mph.The idea is as wondrous as it is audacious: Get on a train at New York City's Penn Station and hit Paris, London or Brussels just an hour later. "From an engineering point of view there are no serious stumbling blocks," says Ernst Frankel, retired professor of ocean engineering at MIT.

    6.23.2008 at 09:10pm - Comment by Ignatius Loyola

    The world seems to be having troubles building infrastructure right now. I don't know how we would be able to convince people to put up the money for this kind of a project. Long term, I don't think it is viable. In addition, the world is in uproar over "terrorism". I think this would be a primary terrorist target, and much easier to attack than anything within a continent. Can the entire length of the tunnel be monitored for depth charges at all times? What would happen if the tunnel blew during a train ride? What about ocean currents? The surface area of such a tunnel is quite large - the tunnel would be thrown about by ocean currents, no matter how weak they are. Neat idea, but unfeasible.

  • Science

    Trans-Atlantic MagLev

    By Posted on 3.4.2008 20 Comments

    What: Submerged OCEANIC tunnel and supersonic train WHERE: New York London Cost: $88 billion $175 billion Crux: Neutrally buoyant vacuum tunnel submerged 150 to 300 feet beneath the Atlantic's surface and anchored to the seafloor, through which zips a magnetically levitated train at up to 4,000 mph.The idea is as wondrous as it is audacious: Get on a train at New York City's Penn Station and hit Paris, London or Brussels just an hour later. "From an engineering point of view there are no serious stumbling blocks," says Ernst Frankel, retired professor of ocean engineering at MIT.

    6.23.2008 at 09:04pm - Comment by Ignatius Loyola

    Your calculation contains a bit of an error. You are missing a conversion. 4000 miles = 4000*5280 ft But we must convert hours to seconds. Therefore, 4000mph = 4000*5280/(60*60) = 5867 ft/s Over the course of 30 minutes, which is 1800 second, we then have an acceleration of, 5867 ft/s / 1800 s = 3.3 ft/s/s So, in reality, we are looking at 1/10 of the gravitational acceleration. Otherwise, yeah, 36.6Gs would be a pretty major hole in their theory!



Download Our iPhone App

Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone with full articles, images and offline viewing



Follow Us On Twitter

Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed



Become a Fan On Facebook

Share links with friends, comment on stories and more


December 2009: Best of What's New

In our December issue, Popular Science names the 100 best innovations of the year: bombproof wallpaper, self-parking cars, the fastest helicopter, and 97 more. Plus inventor profiles and videos.

Check out the best of what's new here.

Popular Science Photo Pool


Share your photos in the Pop Sci pool at www.flickr.com!
tags_sprite.png
POP_embeddedForm_cover_May09.jpg