Slashdot Mirror
World's Longest, Deepest Rail Tunnel Opens In Switzerland (latimes.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Los Angeles Times: More than 2,200 years after the commander from the ancient North African civilization of Carthage led his army of elephants and troops over Europe's highest mountain chain, the Swiss have completed another gargantuan task: burrowing the world's longest railway tunnel under the Swiss Alps to improve European trade and travel. European dignitaries on Wednesday inaugurated the 35.4-mile Gotthard Railway Tunnel, a major engineering achievement deep under the Alps' snow-capped peaks. It took 17 years to build at a cost of 12.2 billion Swiss francs ($12 billion) -- but workers kept to a key Swiss tradition and brought the massive project in on time and on budget. It also bores deeper than any other tunnel, running about 1.4 miles underground at its maximum depth. The thoroughfare aims to cut travel times, ease roadway traffic and reduce the air pollution spewed from trucks traveling between Europe's north and south. Set to open for commercial service in December, the two-way tunnel can handle up to 260 freight trains and 65 passenger trains per day.
Giggity.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Lies. All lies. There's no such thing as tunnels. Or Switzerland, for that matter.
A few years ago when the TBM knocked through the last bit of rock in this tunnel, this cool video of the event might even have been posted on slashdot (can't remember where I ran across it): https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The Gotthard Railway Tunnel was built between 1871 and 1882, and was the world's longest rail tunnel at the time.
This is the Gotthard Base Tunnel (and there is a third tunnel, the Gotthard Road Tunnel).
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
... not only because they did it "on budget and in time", which can only mean they didn't go for the cheapest bidder, but also because it's trains going through the tunnel, only!
Had this been done in proper US-style, that tunnel would have no place for trains, but one lane reserved to military vehicles and the cars of VIP ticket holders, then another lane for ordinary cars, on which a permanent traffic jam would take you 2 hours mininum to pass the tunnel, if only because of the mandatory TSA strip searching before entering.
Simply put, freight capacity.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
At first I wasn't clear on how the tunnel would reduce pollution. Won't the bad gases just come out of the tunnel? But of course, the idea is the tunnel will shift cargo transport from trucks to trains. Presumably trains produce less pollution. Or at least less trash littering the "pristine Swiss landscape"
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
To match the freight and passenger capacity of high-speed trains, you'd need A LOT of flights. None of which will land in a city centre.
A freight train can carry 10,000 tons, a 747 cargo plane can carry 140.
You could run 260 trains or 18,000 planes, which is going to be cheaper?
Among the performances was a topless dancer wearing giant wings who soared over orange-suited dancers as they crawled on the ground below.
At another point, humans dressed like bales of hay were seen swaying on a flatbed before running around on the floor.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
The fee is actually 40 CHF (~36 euros) for 1-year
Wikipedia tells me that temperature increases roughly by 25 degrees C per km of depth so, that would be about 58 degrees C... however apparently the actual temperature at that depth is 46 degrees. So... hellishly hot, but not as hot as expected. What accounts for the difference, is the crust thicker there because of the weight of the alps?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
I'm no expert on the AlpTransits project (which includes the Gotthard Base Tunnel and a number of other new tunnels), but the whole project seems to have been on budget in part because they cut stuff. For example, the Loetschberg Base Tunnel, which is the second longest tunnel in this project, is opened but not complete. They just stopped part way through and declared it good enough (one bore is up and running -- I've been through it -- but the other isn't finished). Or, as wikipedia puts it:
Due to the soaring costs of the AlpTransit initiative, funds were diverted to the Gotthard Base Tunnel; and the LBT [Loetschberg Base Tunnel] is only half finished.
Even worse, work on the Zimmerberg Base Tunnel is suspended -- possibly without plans to complete it.
The whole "on budget and in time" thing doesn't sound so miraculous in context: the Gotthard Base Tunnel is part of a larger project that is neither on time nor on budget. However, the Swiss government sure did a good job spinning it that way.
Airtrains!*
*patent pending
I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
+1 for digging world's most awesome tunnel, ever.
-1 for coming up with this.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
why spend all that money for a tunnel when you can simply fly over the mountains?
One primary use for the tunnel is to keep freight off the autobahn, but because it's a base tunnel, running straight under the Alps, it will allow bullet passenger trains to rip right through from Germany to Italy in half an hour. The old Gotthard Tunnel was the big engineering accomplishment of a century ago, punching through a high pass over the Alps, but it still required that trains spiral up into the mountains to the tunnel entrance, and then spiral down into the valley on the other side.
'Base tunnels' of this type are being built to replace the other long-distance tunnels through high Alpine passes. It will mean that European rail will go from being way ahead of American rail to being ludicrously far ahead of American rail.
Even if these were diesel trains (they're actually electric), there would be a significant reduction in pollution because trains are incredibly efficient and trucks are not. All things being equal, a gallon of diesel fuel will move one ton of cargo over 200 miles on a railroad (or over 400 miles, depending on your reference). Trucks are nowhere close to that efficient.
It's hard to overstate how efficient trains are at moving cargo; no other land method comes close. (You can only do better on boats/barges.)
Nitpick: in Europe, a typical freight train carries more like 4000 tons, not 10k. 10k trains are the multi-mile thingies you guys run across the Great Plains in the US. Here, we are a bit more limited w/r to train length, and some other factors. Your point is of course still valid, though.
[Gasps and heavy breathing echo in the chambers of commerce.]
Merkel: "We now have but one choice."
[Light appears from Merkel's staff, showing the startled and frightened faces of the EU Councillors.]
Merkel: "We must face the long dark of Swiss Alps. Be on your guard. There are older and fouler things than Italians, in the deep places of the world."
Merkel: "Quietly now. It's a 30-minute journey to the other side. Let us hope that our presence may go unnoticed."
[Time passes. The EU Council enters a great cavern.]
[Merkel rests her hand upon a rock with a dark, silver veins running through it.]
Merkel: "The wealth of Switzerland was not in gold or jewels"
[The Chancellor tilts her staff down towards a clock.]
Merkel: "but Time."