Trains.com

Vacuum Tube Trains

9089 views
48 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Thursday, April 18, 2013 6:39 PM

Bonas
This proves that high speed trains are a socialist consprisy that will kill rock and roll and makes us listen to Disco and Europop-Just look at her red dress

I refuse to listen to those high fallutin Eurapeen klassikal musicalsisian guys play anythin.  I want Elvis.  

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 333 posts
Posted by ontheBNSF on Thursday, April 18, 2013 3:15 PM

Bonas

This proves that high speed trains are a socialist consprisy that will kill rock and roll and makes us listen to Disco and Europop-Just look at her red dress

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7M3EOD_GzE

I don't see how this would be "socialism". Glenn Beck and his minions have perverted that word beyond its meaning. Socialism is workers owning the means of production so unless this swissmetro will be worker owned or worker runned I don't see the "socialism"

Railroad to Freedom

  • Member since
    March 2013
  • 252 posts
Posted by Bonas on Thursday, April 18, 2013 3:03 PM

This proves that high speed trains are a socialist consprisy that will kill rock and roll and makes us listen to Disco and Europop-Just look at her red dress

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7M3EOD_GzE

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Wednesday, April 17, 2013 11:22 AM

Overmod

Yes.  And be constantly calling secretaries in Government bureaucratic offices to have them page your brother, Mike...

BABOOM, no I wasn't going there I was just referencing one of Gene Rodenberry's favorite character names..

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Wednesday, April 10, 2013 2:08 PM

Yes.  And be constantly calling secretaries in Government bureaucratic offices to have them page your brother, Mike...

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Wednesday, April 10, 2013 1:40 PM

Overmod

The long-distance gravity vactrains are different from the Subshuttles, which were more like a subterranean Interstate Highway System (nominally built for defense purposes, and only involving 'hundreds of miles per hour' speed.)  All the stuff about air pressure and evacuation power would apply to Subshuttles, if they were real instead of 'special effects.'

Yes, I did like those double navels...

I would never troll forums or engage in other obnoxious on-line activities like creating "sock puppet" accounts to facilitate the same, but I did get a chuckle at the thought setting up an account for the sole purpose serving as a "prophet" for tube trains..

my user name would be "Dylan Hunt" , of course..

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, April 6, 2013 5:51 AM

The long-distance gravity vactrains are different from the Subshuttles, which were more like a subterranean Interstate Highway System (nominally built for defense purposes, and only involving 'hundreds of miles per hour' speed.)  All the stuff about air pressure and evacuation power would apply to Subshuttles, if they were real instead of 'special effects.'

Yes, I did like those double navels...

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Friday, April 5, 2013 11:23 PM

And the ultimate question about Vactrains is will we be able to see Mariette Hartley with two navels?

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Friday, April 5, 2013 1:46 PM

Overmod

Paul Milenkovic

Somebody posted back to tell me I had it all wrong and that China plans to have a prototype Vactrain going in 10 years.  So, what do I know, China is going to have their Vactrain.


 

Can you please provide the cites you were given on this project?  I'd like to see exactly what its scope is, and how they plan to construct and power it...

Watchyapickinonme for?  Forum member ontheBNSF told me China would have a Vactrain in 10 years.  See

ontheBNSF

Paul Milenkovic

Dad's explanation is that an elliptical orbit cutting through the Earth takes 80 minutes for a round trip (OK, so a more precise number is 84 minutes then), so the one-way trip time would be 42 minutes then.  But don't forget the 4 hours for clearing security on departure, immigration and customs on arrival, local ground transportation on each end, making the trip 4 hours and 42 minutes.

But maybe 84 minutes is the correct time if you are doing a practical ultra-high-speed vacuum-tunnel train rather than a straight-line free-fall route.  But you still need to add 4 hours to that figure.


It is premature to talk about Vactrains when we can't get around to doing the first U.S. HSR, and I am not saying that the idea is practical with current technology, but the idea is serious and not an April Fool's joke -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vactrain.  For all of the ridicule directed at Vactrains, many in the broader non train enthusiast public reserve the same feelings for proper HSR.  As I said, Vactrains may be a particularly energy saving mode of transportation for an advanced technological civilization in some distant future.

Why is it premature or for some distant civilization in the future? China will have the technology ready in 2015.

Citations?  Check out the video posted as the grandparent post to this thread, especially the video from PopSci.  Dontchaknow that if Popular Science says something is going to happen, you can expect it by next year?

Also, for you folks ragging on me about pie-in-the-sky-ballistic-intercontinental Vactrains, that was all meant as the setup for a joke punchline. 

Semiballistic max time is about 54 minutes.  You 'physicists' seem to be forgetting your great-circle navigation; the furthest-removed destination being only one-half a great circle (otherwise you'd just go the other way) and the effective flightpath being only slightly longer.

Intercontinental tube trains are an expensive, geologically-unsound answer to a question nobody has asked.  I would recommend that discussion stick to established 'destination pairs' for which the traffic is cost-effective relative to the expenses.  Any thought of orbital speed -- and I haven't seen anyone indicate just what they think the speed for an 84-minute orbit actually is, although it is well-established -- in a tube on the ground goes beyond fantasy into the realm of active danger and ethical stupidity.  In my opinion.  For what it's worth.

RME

The minimum travel time between any two points on the Earth is 4 hours and 40 minutes.  That is 40 minutes for the ballistic-free-fall Vactrain and 2 hours for ground transportation and pre and postboarding screening at the two ends, get it?  The joke is that if we ever get a near-instantaneous form of transportation, you will still have to tack 4 hours on the door-to-door time.  Sheesh!

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, April 4, 2013 8:44 PM

Check in the mail?  I thought I was sending it by vacuum tube when the 'pilot' bore is put in...

  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Thursday, April 4, 2013 7:23 PM

Overmod
I applaud your temerity.

Temerity is my middle name.  Does this mean I won't be seeing your check in my mail?

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, April 4, 2013 6:34 PM

Paul Milenkovic

Somebody posted back to tell me I had it all wrong and that China plans to have a prototype Vactrain going in 10 years.  So, what do I know, China is going to have their Vactrain.

Can you please provide the cites you were given on this project?  I'd like to see exactly what its scope is, and how they plan to construct and power it...

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Thursday, April 4, 2013 4:29 PM

carnej1

Paul Milenkovic

carnej1

NASA, the US DOT and other entities have done R&D but nobody has a secret plan to roll out a vactrain network in the next 2 years..

Um, China in the next 10 years?

Is that a prediction or can you cite an actual,funded program?

I had suggested that Vactrains would be a possibility for some advanced civilization in the future -- kinda like Arthur C Clarke's early short story "Rescue Party" that features an interstellar rescue party to an abandoned planet with the sun about to go "nova."

Somebody posted back to tell me I had it all wrong and that China plans to have a prototype Vactrain going in 10 years.  So, what do I know, China is going to have their Vactrain.

 

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, April 4, 2013 12:18 PM

Note: assume absence of whooooosh factor in what follows.  

Firelock76
sambard Kingdom Brunel came up with a vacuum propelled railway in the 1850's.  That was a bust as rats and mice had a bad habit of eating the greased leather flaps that sealed the system.  

Far more to the relative 'failure' of Brunel's vacuum traction than the leather flaps, or other 'likely' sources of animal interference.  It's difficult to keep the vacuum piston and head aligned with the tube while the vehicle is negotiating a very different profile of track.  Switches are... well, let's just say 'not very cost effective'.  And then we come to the requirements for the pumping plant(s), and accumulators instead of reservoirs, and the size of piston needed to propel more than a couple of waggon-loads of freight with less than an atmosphere of effective pressure to do the job...

John WR

How can you suggest that I fail to understand vacuum tube railways, an idea that has been around since at least 1850?  I mean what is so hard about constructing an underground tube similar to those now used in banks but big enough for people to ride in, exhausting the air in that tube, putting people in a compartment similar to the ones that banks use at openings in the tube and zipping them off to where ever they want to go?

Well, how long a list do you want about why it's hard to BUILD, as opposed to imagine?  (Note: John, this is not for you, it's for the people who initialized this thread.)

There is a very large difference between sending a 4" diameter carrier a few blocks and sending a train continental distances, presumably with gravitational acceleration.  Even if the telpher system uses full vacuum and no air boost behind.

The chief stupidity with the gravity vacuum trains is the presumption that you can put a straight, vacuum-tight tube through a large stretch of the lower mantle, and at each end through moving plates.  Were you going to use scrith?  What were you going to use to hold the bore open before lining it?  It's little details like these that make the idea somewhat harder to translate into engineering possibility... we won't take up economic practicality, or even due regard for human safety, until later.

Let's take the 'exhausting the air from that tube' as an example.  Just exactly how much air are you talking about, and what kind of pumps were you going to use?  (I presume you are aware that the expressed volume per time of pump operation goes down with the pressure...)  And while we're at it: a 'normal' vacuum transport system will pump from multiple ports.  You're going to put those where?  And exhaust them to where?  Now compare that pumping power with, well, traction power for HSR, or energy to run methane liquefication plants for semiballistic aircraft.  How did that old AT&T commercial go -- 'where's my big savings?'  The 'free' gravitational acceleration looks like less of a bargain.  

Now let's investigate what happens behind the train -- any train -- that accelerates into the now-presumably-well-enough-evacuated tube.  Hint: Gravity is not straight down at the tube entrance, so you will need some motor action ... probably LIM with long fixed stators in sections... to get reasonable trip time.  What fun if the LIM at the other end fails to deploy with correct timing and phase! ... something you are highly likely to discover only at actual deceleration time?  You can flood the tube with air, but that's likely to leave the train far down in the tunnel, if indeed not actively rebounding down the hole... so for any accident, you either need a self-propelled tug that can connect to the train to pull it out of... where it has slid by the time you get there... or you need to put a passive LIM "rotor" in the tube structure all the way.  Which would be fine, except you will assuredly get to the Curie point for your LIM material at a comparatively short distance into the tunnel, and I would suspect higher temperature excursion... unless, hey!  I know!  let's put heat pipes down the walls to keep the temperature in the bore equalized!  How long did you say that tunnel was going to be? ... 

I have not even had to get to the fun if there is even a comparatively small leak in the train pressurization.  Oxygen masks dropping from the overhead will NOT address the significant problems this will cause for the passengers.  To give you a transit analogy, think Malbone Street, but this time with no survivors.  Will your company be better capitalized than the Brooklyn system was? sure hope so!

Of course for it to run on rails the rails also would have to be sealed.

I strongly suspect that no rotating wheel-on-rail system will be dynamically stable at the peak speed this thing needs to run -- have you, for example, calculated the peripheral speed of your wheel at max V?  (That was a limiting factor on rotational speed for 8" hard drive technology, btw... the math gives interesting numbers.)

The current 'favorite' for this system has to be magnetic levitation.  Passive levitation, that is, meaning that the timing and power circuitry has to be on the train, with fairly hard limits on dissipation of waste heat.  I could mention quench in this context, but I'm sure you've already looked at those implications.  Now what happens if you have even a momentary power or control failure during, well, most of the transit time?  This is not like an aircraft failure, where there is time to react and plenty of space for recovery.  

 Gas bearings a la Arnold Miller's train might work, but they would destroy the vacuum and would still not prevent unique sorts of problem if their performance were to degrade...

And as you point our, Isembard Kingdom Brunel had it all down pat ...

About as much as Caselli had it all down pat with the Pantelegraph.  A cautionary tale.  What was it Firelock76 said about the French?  C'est la vie...

... and we need only to follow his plans but replace the leather seals with rubber ones ...

... in order to move relatively small mass at blinding speeds up to 75mph, with a motive-power plant twice the size of a locomotive...

 

... or a kind that will not attract mice.  (Actually a field mouse did eat his way through a rubber seal at the bottom of my garage door.  I think this gives me special experience to be on the design team).
 

Mouse has even more distinctive competence to be on the design team, or at least the test team...

I am organizing a company to set up a vacutrain.  This is a sure thing.  And I am giving you the opportunity to get in on the ground floor.  Even a small investment would make you rich.  Tell me how much you want to put in to the company.

Problem I keep having is "sure thing for WHO"?  As in 'where are the clients' yachts' but on a truly Obamanansi-esque scale.  I applaud your temerity.  But, since even a small investment should make me rich, I'll contribute a small investment and watch for it to grow, much like Angus Sinclair's washerwoman.  More important still will be the knowledge that I have contributed in some small measure to the experience and wisdom of humanity... although, granted, in ways not directly positive...

RME

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Thursday, April 4, 2013 11:16 AM

Paul Milenkovic

carnej1

NASA, the US DOT and other entities have done R&D but nobody has a secret plan to roll out a vactrain network in the next 2 years..

Um, China in the next 10 years?

Is that a prediction or can you cite an actual,funded program?

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Thursday, April 4, 2013 10:58 AM

Firelock76
sambard Kingdom Brunel came up with a vacuum propelled railway in the 1850's.  That was a bust as rats and mice had a bad habit of eating the greased leather flaps that sealed the system.  I believe the French tried the same system and had the same critter problems.  C'est la vie!

Wayne,

How can you suggest that I fail to understand vacuum tube railways, an idea that has been around since at least 1850?  I mean what is so hard about constructing an underground tube similar to those now used in banks but big enough for people to ride in, exhausting the air in that tube, putting people in a compartment similar to the ones that banks use at openings in the tube and zipping them off to where ever they want to go?

Although there need not be an actual train of cars and banks use single containers, not trains of them clearly this is similar to a railroad train.  Of course for it to run on rails the rails also would have to be sealed.  

And as you point our, Isembard Kingdom Brunel had it all down pat and we need only to follow his plans but replace the leather seals with rubber ones or a kind that will not attract mice.  (Actually a field mouse did eat his way through a rubber seal at the bottom of my garage door.  I think this gives me special experience to be on the design team).  

I am organizing a company to set up a vacutrain.  This is a sure thing.  And I am giving you the opportunity to get in on the ground floor.  Even a small investment would make you rich.  Tell me how much you want to put in to the company.

John

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Thursday, April 4, 2013 9:48 AM

erikem

Paul Milenkovic

Dad's explanation is that an elliptical orbit cutting through the Earth takes 80 minutes for a round trip (OK, so a more precise number is 84 minutes then), so the one-way trip time would be 42 minutes then.  But don't forget the 4 hours for clearing security on departure, immigration and customs on arrival, local ground transportation on each end, making the trip 4 hours and 42 minutes.

I seem to recall that 84 minutes was also the period of a pendulum with a length equal to the earth's radius, this time period coming up in the alignment of Inertial navigation systems. I do recall that the travel time was the same for any route.

But maybe 84 minutes is the correct time if you are doing a practical ultra-high-speed vacuum-tunnel train rather than a straight-line free-fall route.  But you still need to add 4 hours to that figure.

42 minutes may very well be the travel time, I'm not making any claims about my memory being infallible.

Semiballistic max time is about 54 minutes.  You 'physicists' seem to be forgetting your great-circle navigation; the furthest-removed destination being only one-half a great circle (otherwise you'd just go the other way) and the effective flightpath being only slightly longer.

Intercontinental tube trains are an expensive, geologically-unsound answer to a question nobody has asked.  I would recommend that discussion stick to established 'destination pairs' for which the traffic is cost-effective relative to the expenses.  Any thought of orbital speed -- and I haven't seen anyone indicate just what they think the speed for an 84-minute orbit actually is, although it is well-established -- in a tube on the ground goes beyond fantasy into the realm of active danger and ethical stupidity.  In my opinion.  For what it's worth.

RME

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • From: Potomac Yard
  • 2,767 posts
Posted by NittanyLion on Wednesday, April 3, 2013 9:32 AM

Good for China.  They can waste the money and figure out that its a hilarious, unworkable disaster.

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Tuesday, April 2, 2013 2:44 PM

carnej1

NASA, the US DOT and other entities have done R&D but nobody has a secret plan to roll out a vactrain network in the next 2 years..

Um, China in the next 10 years?

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    November 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Tuesday, April 2, 2013 11:21 AM

Jim200
The Vactrain is a very interesting concept for high speed travel and there are many possible designs. What I envision is two clear plastic tubes going above ground on cement or other support and a car accelerated at each end by a linear electric motor to speeds of 1000 mph or more. Unfortunately, magnetic Levitation is expensive, and I am looking to reduce or replace it with something else, since the tube is already a guideway. Regenerative braking at the destination could reduce the energy needed for a returning car. Possible one hour destinations from Chicago are Denver, Dallas , New Orleans, Atlanta, New York..,The Vactrain appears to be doable with today's technology, but there are still a thousand little details. The Chinese will have their concept in a few years, and probably NASA or others are working on it here.

The point your missing is that that idea has been kicking around for half a century and so far nobody has found a way to justify it economically. NASA, the US DOT and other entities have done R&D but nobody has a secret plan to roll out a vactrain network in the next 2 years..

 I do think you can speculate about what will be going on 100 years from now but so far the idea has been "just around the corner" for decades..

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    October 2012
  • 177 posts
Posted by Jim200 on Tuesday, April 2, 2013 1:51 AM
The Vactrain is a very interesting concept for high speed travel and there are many possible designs. What I envision is two clear plastic tubes going above ground on cement or other support and a car accelerated at each end by a linear electric motor to speeds of 1000 mph or more. Unfortunately, magnetic Levitation is expensive, and I am looking to reduce or replace it with something else, since the tube is already a guideway. Regenerative braking at the destination could reduce the energy needed for a returning car. Possible one hour destinations from Chicago are Denver, Dallas , New Orleans, Atlanta, New York..,The Vactrain appears to be doable with today's technology, but there are still a thousand little details. The Chinese will have their concept in a few years, and probably NASA or others are working on it here.
  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Sunday, March 31, 2013 11:13 AM

The Polar Express, a child's fantasy movie includes a vacuum tube train.  

  • Member since
    February 2008
  • From: Potomac Yard
  • 2,767 posts
Posted by NittanyLion on Friday, March 29, 2013 7:07 PM

Antipodal travel is extremely rare anyhow, so that raw orbital time isn't really useful.

On the other hand, a suborbital spaceflight would take ten more minutes but cost an order of magnitude less.  And make use of existing infrastructure too.

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Wednesday, March 27, 2013 11:19 PM

Paul Milenkovic

Dad's explanation is that an elliptical orbit cutting through the Earth takes 80 minutes for a round trip (OK, so a more precise number is 84 minutes then), so the one-way trip time would be 42 minutes then.  But don't forget the 4 hours for clearing security on departure, immigration and customs on arrival, local ground transportation on each end, making the trip 4 hours and 42 minutes.

I seem to recall that 84 minutes was also the period of a pendulum with a length equal to the earth's radius, this time period coming up in the alignment of Inertial navigation systems. I do recall that the travel time was the same for any route.

But maybe 84 minutes is the correct time if you are doing a practical ultra-high-speed vacuum-tunnel train rather than a straight-line free-fall route.  But you still need to add 4 hours to that figure.

42 minutes may very well be the travel time, I'm not making any claims about my memory being infallible.

  • Member since
    August 2012
  • 3,727 posts
Posted by John WR on Wednesday, March 27, 2013 8:08 PM

ontheBNSF
Why is it premature or for some distant civilization in the future? China will have the technology ready in 2015.

Will they?  China no doubt has hugh potential.  But it is a country that is still industrializing and it seems to suffer all of the problems the US had when we were industrializing.  Eventually it did happen but there were a lot of false starts and delays on the way.  

  • Member since
    May 2012
  • 333 posts
Posted by ontheBNSF on Wednesday, March 27, 2013 2:34 PM

Paul Milenkovic

Dad's explanation is that an elliptical orbit cutting through the Earth takes 80 minutes for a round trip (OK, so a more precise number is 84 minutes then), so the one-way trip time would be 42 minutes then.  But don't forget the 4 hours for clearing security on departure, immigration and customs on arrival, local ground transportation on each end, making the trip 4 hours and 42 minutes.

But maybe 84 minutes is the correct time if you are doing a practical ultra-high-speed vacuum-tunnel train rather than a straight-line free-fall route.  But you still need to add 4 hours to that figure.


It is premature to talk about Vactrains when we can't get around to doing the first U.S. HSR, and I am not saying that the idea is practical with current technology, but the idea is serious and not an April Fool's joke -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vactrain.  For all of the ridicule directed at Vactrains, many in the broader non train enthusiast public reserve the same feelings for proper HSR.  As I said, Vactrains may be a particularly energy saving mode of transportation for an advanced technological civilization in some distant future.

Why is it premature or for some distant civilization in the future? China will have the technology ready in 2015.

Railroad to Freedom

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Wednesday, March 27, 2013 2:29 PM

Dad's explanation is that an elliptical orbit cutting through the Earth takes 80 minutes for a round trip (OK, so a more precise number is 84 minutes then), so the one-way trip time would be 42 minutes then.  But don't forget the 4 hours for clearing security on departure, immigration and customs on arrival, local ground transportation on each end, making the trip 4 hours and 42 minutes.

But maybe 84 minutes is the correct time if you are doing a practical ultra-high-speed vacuum-tunnel train rather than a straight-line free-fall route.  But you still need to add 4 hours to that figure.


It is premature to talk about Vactrains when we can't get around to doing the first U.S. HSR, and I am not saying that the idea is practical with current technology, but the idea is serious and not an April Fool's joke -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vactrain.  For all of the ridicule directed at Vactrains, many in the broader non train enthusiast public reserve the same feelings for proper HSR.  As I said, Vactrains may be a particularly energy saving mode of transportation for an advanced technological civilization in some distant future.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Wednesday, March 27, 2013 9:25 AM

I suspect that since April 1 is almost upon us, "Vacuum Tube Trains" etc. is part of that meme.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Wednesday, March 27, 2013 12:31 AM

I remember reading about the "hole to China" idea in Time magazine circa 1967. My recollection was that the travel time was 84 minutes between any two points, but keep in mind that reading took place closer to a half century ago than I'd like to admit, so my memory may be wrong.

One detail that stuck in my mind was that a line from Boston to Washington would be 5 miles below sea level at the center, which is getting close to the limit of any foreseeable tunneling technology. Intercontinental distances would require drilling through the mantle, where the temperature and pressure would be more than a match for any foreseeable material.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy