Transatlantic Tunnel - Possible?

[Up_Tilt_390]

The idea of a Transatlantic Tunnel has served as an inspiration for visionary engineers. The idea is an airless submerged floating tunnel anchored down to the ocean floor approximately 6000km/4000mi long connecting Europe with North America, in particular London to New York City. Stock would be Maglev trains running between 500 and 8000km/h (310 and 5000mph) which would shrink the trip from 8 hours to just under 1 hour. The project would be estimated to cost as much as $12 trillion.

Me and friend have wondered lately, do any of you guys think that such a staggering project is possible. Personally, I think that the project will never be possible. I do believe the technology we have does make it possible, but the cost would be more then the national GDP of the United States and China (not combined). What makes it impossible for me though is one simple word that was a hindrance for the Channel Tunnel, but on a much larger scale here: GEOLOGY.

The Atlantic Ocean is getting bigger every year due to tectonic plate movements. The Mid-Atlantic Ridge, a divergent boundary, no matter what route you would take, would always get in the tunnel's way. As the Americas drift away from Europe and Africa by 2cm every year, this would surely rip the tunnel apart, and the cost to maintain and expand it would be so expensive, it wouldn't be seen as profitable in any case.

BUT... that is just my opinion, I personally want to know what you think of the idea of a Transatlantic Tunnel, and whether it could in fact be possible to build this mega engineering project. The more you have to say the better, I'd love to hear your personal cases for it. Thanks

 

[BestWestern]

Absolutely zero chance, ever. Too expensive for the investment to ever be viewed as worthwhile within any considered timeframe, too technically complex both to build and to maintain, and far too dangerous - I would suggest that space travel probably represents a less risky form of transport than a maglev doing Mach 5 through an unstable 'floating tunnel'. Money far better spent on developing a larger capacity replacement for Concorde!

 

[cf111]

We'll be teleporting across the Atlantic long before there's a tunnel!

 

[NotATrainspott]

When you take into account the future construction cost reductions as a result of massively improved automation and other innovation in areas like materials science, the cost of connecting up the world's mega-cities by vacuum tube would be nothing compared to the benefits it would bring to the world's economy. New York to London would be one of the more challenging routes but there's plenty of shorter routes to test out the technologies. For instance, it would be possible with today's technology to build a fully tunnelled route from London to Paris. After wheeled HSR, moving to magnetic levitation is the only way to decrease speeds further and so help to pay back the cost of the tunnel, and when you have a fully enclosed route the obvious move is to try and evacuate as much air as possible so that air friction is minimised (with the energy needed to keep air out of an enclosed tunnel being much less than the reduction in energy wastage at high speeds due to friction).

 

[DaleCooper]

I think the spreading of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge is the least of the problems, 2cm a year over a 6000km length should be possible to accommodate by expansion joints or simply having the tunnel snake across the ocean so it could gradually straighten out. After all in 1000 years the movement would be 20m or 0.0003% (if I've got the decimal point in the right place) I think that is less than the thermal expansion of steel due to a 1 degree temperature change (0.000012/K). In fact it is so small it probably doesn't need to any special measures at all. Think of the movement which long suspension bridges can withstand, which is far greater in proportion to their length, or the flexing of skyscrapers in the wind.

 

[Holly]

The idea of a Transatlantic Tunnel has served as an inspiration for visionary engineers. The idea is an airless submerged floating tunnel anchored ...

There isn't even any talk of building a rail tunnel under the Darien Gap, which would be a thousand times more feasible and very valuable. To link North America to South America.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

I think the spreading of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge is the least of the problems, 2cm a year over a 6000km length should be possible to accommodate by expansion joints or simply having the tunnel snake across the ocean so it could gradually straighten out. After all in 1000 years the movement would be 20m or 0.0003% (if I've got the decimal point in the right place) I think that is less than the thermal expansion of steel due to a 1 degree temperature change (0.000012/K). In fact it is so small it probably doesn't need to any special measures at all. Think of the movement which long suspension bridges can withstand, which is far greater in proportion to their length, or the flexing of skyscrapers in the wind.

That sounds like extremely difficult and expensive engineering when put like that. Plus, if the tunnel was to be snaked to straighten out, the anchors holding it down to the ocean floor to prevent it floating away would have to do the same. I may have misunderstood, but the seafloor spreading process seems to be the problem in any case. As long as the Atlantic keeps getting bigger, the tunnel will need to be too, which will make it more expensive than it already is. Again, I may have misunderstood.

 

[unlevel42]

Sea tunnel needs only to be 1400 miles long with no need for any expansion.

The distance between London and New York City is less than 3500 miles.
Lengthening the journey by 150 miles via Labrador and Oban would only need a 2000 mile sea tunnel.
The 4000 mile journey routed via Labrador, Greenland, Iceland and Scotland would need 3 sea tunnels totalling 1400 miles with the advantage of crossing the mid Atlantic ridge on dry land .

 

[bluenoxid]

Potentially a solution would be for a break in journey at Iceland. Potentially the vehicle could be slowed down, travel in the open air then enter a second tunnel

 

[Stuwhu]

Potentially a solution would be for a break in journey at Iceland. Potentially the vehicle could be slowed down, travel in the open air then enter a second tunnel

Just think of the opportunities for split tickets that could arise..

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Potentially a solution would be for a break in journey at Iceland. Potentially the vehicle could be slowed down, travel in the open air then enter a second tunnel

Iceland by its very position is a most unstable location. Just think of the natural forces that led to the creation of Surtsey.

 

[DaleCooper]

That sounds like extremely difficult and expensive engineering when put like that. Plus, if the tunnel was to be snaked to straighten out, the anchors holding it down to the ocean floor to prevent it floating away would have to do the same. I may have misunderstood, but the seafloor spreading process seems to be the problem in any case. As long as the Atlantic keeps getting bigger, the tunnel will need to be too, which will make it more expensive than it already is. Again, I may have misunderstood.

Try rereading my penultimate sentence. The conclusion I came to after doing the calculations was that there was no need to do anything because the movement is so small, even over 1000 years it is much less than other large structures have to withstand due to temperature changes.

I should add that I'm not a structural engineer and might have got it completely wrong. Perhaps someone could check my calculations.

 

[Camden]

If avoiding under the sea is desirable, then given the speeds spoken about, the maximum sea tunnel required is 75 miles.

25 between Folkestone and Calais, and then 50 miles between Uelen and Wales. Yep, Wales.

 

[185]

XC nearly ran their own transatlantic service after a wheelslip at St Erth some years ago :P

 

[ian959]

There are infinitely better ways to spend over $12 trillion surely? There is no chance of such a tunnel being built, even if it were technically feasible. H & S issues alone for redundancy and safety would make the project pretty much unfeasible.

 

[Howardh]

Never use the word "impossible" (my old geography teacher told me!) but on scales of impossibility - which is the least likely; a tunnel, a floating tunnel or a floating bridge?

For the cost of any of the three it may be cheaper to build the tunnel in space and run shuttles (a bit like a car-lift only 60 miles high) to the start and end. But by the time any of the four are even seriously considered, we will be flying through space as a matter of course to get from one end of the planet to the other.

As for The Isle Of Wight....anyone with a few million to spare??

EDIT - if there was an undersea tunnel, in theory would it follow the curvature of the earth or go - if possible - in a straight line (ie deeper but shorter) and what would the temperature be at the "deepest" point? *Remember, theory only, not a proposal for the next Tory manisfesto!!!

 

[blackfive460]

Someone has been reading Harry Harrison's, 'A Transatlantic Tunnel, Hurrah!' again!

 

[DarloRich]

Has someone been watching Thunderbirds again?

 

[DaleCooper]

Just a thought but why would anyone want a transatlantic tunnel? With the advance of technology the need to travel or transport goods could well diminish, with the internet, virtual reality, 3D printing and who knows what else that might be invented in the next 50 years, or perhaps a totally new method of transport may be invented such as man-made wormholes connecting London, New York, Beijing and Rio de Janeiro. Don't forget that 100 years ago your mobile phone would have looked like a science fiction writer's wild fantasy.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Apart from some track gauge issues and a short gap between Russia and Alaska, wouldn't it be simpler to use the existing railways and go the other way?

 

[najaB]

I personally want to know what you think of the idea of a Transatlantic Tunnel, and whether it could in fact be possible to build this mega engineering project. The more you have to say the better, I'd love to hear your personal cases for it. Thanks

Possible? Yes. Practical? Dubious. In any of our lifetimes? Not a chance. It would be slower (and probably just as expensive) for passenger travel. You want faster freight? Then have a look at the Aeroscraft and similar developments. Heck, even a Caspian Sea Monster is more likely.

In short, I see a trans-Atlantic tunnel as a solution looking for a problem, while fighting off better solutions!

 

[MotorcycleAlan]

Is it 1st January or is it suddenly 1st April? If so what happened to 3 months. Can't believe this is even being discussed. Happy New Year everyone if it is 1 January still.

 

[Haydn1971]

Apart from some track gauge issues and a short gap between Russia and Alaska, wouldn't it be simpler to use the existing railways and go the other way?

I'd say that this is much more likely - it's about 9000 miles to the eastern tip of Russia, then possibly another 5000 miles to New York - using today's technologies, Japanese Maglev, it would cost upwards of £3.5 Trillion and take about 43 hrs to travel the 14,000 miles and probably require several nuclear power stations to power the line. Heavy rapid freight from Europe to North America using Ekranoplan type ideas is perhaps more likely, but only if air travel becomes impracticable, but if that ever happened, I'd doubt the global economy would sustain alternative options.

 

[6Gman]

Just think of the opportunities for split tickets that could arise..

Where's that like button!

 

[Howardh]

What's the fastest a submarine can go? Is there any limit to underwater travel speed?? Won't be much of a view admittedly, even if they had windows. So any regular on the Manchester-London route will feel at home. Submerged under water on the outside, and can't see it from the inside

 

[Peter Mugridge]

What's the fastest a submarine can go? Is there any limit to underwater travel speed?? Won't be much of a view admittedly, even if they had windows. So any regular on the Manchester-London route will feel at home. Submerged under water on the outside, and can't see it from the inside

It would be far more energy efficient and much faster to build a new express liner. Remember, the QE2 could do the crossing flat out in four nights...

 

[PMN1]

It would be far more energy efficient and much faster to build a new express liner. Remember, the QE2 could do the crossing flat out in four nights...

I've seen suggestions for a nuclear powered 15,000 ton surface effect ship that would carry the equivalent of 2,000 cars at 130kts.

 

[Iskra]

Everyone's talking about geography, but politically; would the Americans want to be connected to Europe by a tunnel? I'm not convinced.

 

[Howardh]

Everyone's talking about geography, but politically; would the Americans want to be connected to Europe by a tunnel? I'm not convinced.

Yes, it's hard enough to convince people in Kent....

 

[fowler9]

Completely doable. Also completely undesirable. Maybe one day when due to cheap, quick long distance space travel we have what may seem to be an inexhaustable source of resources it may be good. With current population growth and our inability to deal with it along with rates of consumption I would say forget it.