Re: How quickly can major infrastructure go up?

Catja Pafort wrote:
Old Toby wrote:


Good. Putting it in place at the same time you're planning above-ground
structures will save time. You can have inside access to most relevant
buildings, shopping malls etc.

The only above ground structures in that world are the stations and the
transdimensional hub (run by the same company, you see).

So what's the weather like? It's a lot cheaper to knock out above-ground
structures than to build underground. I fondly remember the days a new
mole diger was tried out in Germany, resulting in two biciclyst, several
cars, and a full-sized bus being swallowed by resulting holes.

No, give me above-ground stuff every day.

Err, to clarify, I'm calling it a "subway" because its cars and
service are exactly what you would expect of a subway (rather
than, say, light rail or commuter trains), but the tracks run
at ground level. I suppose one could call them structures as
well...

A massive building, 1/2 sq. mile in floor area, housing a
transdimensional shipping hub.
How do people move around that? Architecturally, it will be a challenge,
but the logistics are what scares me.
For foot traffic, it's somewhat like an airport, only with no gaps for
the planes between piers, and multiple cross corridors, instead of
everything sticking off one central axis. It's the much larger road
connections underneath that are scary...


If I enter your structure at one end, will I have to walk to the other
side? Will Marilee? Even today's airports are problematic and tend to
provide scooters, shuttles and moving walkways. I woulnd't be surprised
to see your security staff on bicycles or rollerblading.

It's big enough to have multiple subway stops within it. In addition,
there will be moving sidewalks and you can rent little electric carts.

An "off world" parallel street network, with numerous causeways
crossing large rivers.
I'd guess they'll be sensible and follow contours - it'll be much
cheaper and much faster *not* to bulldoze a parallel grid into the
landscape, and easier to deal with sewage and runoff if you're not
fighting the environment.
Good heavens, why would you want to build on that world? You wouldn't
relieve any congestion at all.

Sorry, for some reason I was thinking 'ordinary worlds' which have an
infrastructure. It's a giant trailer camp for migrant workers, then?

No, it's just streets, and maybe some highways as well. In between the
streets you have wilderness (which may be appropriated for unofficial
use in some cases). As traffic grows, the streets are widened, potentially until the whole area is streets.

Major coal power plants.
Why coal? Why aren't you planning something that's efficient, if you're
doing so much engineering already? Geothermal, local furnices, that sort
of thing?
coal is cheap, the plant is on high ground, and nobody cares about _that_ world's environment.

How do you get energy from one plane to another?

Run an electric cable through the gate.

And a shiny new container port?
Only if you have oceans to ship things on
The problem isn't having the oceans, it's having the ships.


How are you getting stuff from one plane to another?

Gates. They appear in three dimensional space as flat disks
perpendicular to strong gravitational fields (on Earth this
means Earth). Walking through them brings you to an alternate
timeline. You need large amounts of energy and special
equipment to punch a gate through the fabric of space-time,
but once it is opened, it can be maintained with much less
equipment and energy. But if allowed to close, it closes,
and must be punched over from cratch. The larger the gate,
the more energy it takes to create and sustain it. Few
gates are large enough to handle container ships.

Old Toby
Least Known Dog on the Net
.

Relevant Pages

  • Princess Assists Seattle Citizens!
    ... I received this information from the Northwest Energy Efficiency ... Seattle City Light is ... curbs emissions from cruise ships docked in Elliott Bay. ...
    (rec.travel.cruises)
  • Re: Seeming paradox
    ... The source of the issue is that Kinetic Energy, ... The 3 ships. ... one of the two ships fires out another heavy ball (releasing energy ... So a viewer who viewed the whole experiment would think that the ship speeds ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Interstellar Transport Ship TASMANIA (late 21C setting)...
    ... ships does burn something out of the sky that they shouldn't have. ... but TASMANIA ... Conservation of energy applies, in order to accelerate at 8 gravities ... boost to very high speeds. ...
    (rec.games.frp.gurps)
  • Seeming paradox
    ... The source of the issue is that Kinetic Energy, ... The 3 ships. ... one of the two ships fires out another heavy ball (releasing energy ... So a viewer who viewed the whole experiment would think that the ship speeds ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Interstellar Transport Ship TASMANIA (late 21C setting)...
    ... ships does burn something out of the sky that they shouldn't have. ... but TASMANIA ... Conservation of energy applies, in order to accelerate at 8 gravities ... engine is not truly reactionless, it reacts against the external masses ...
    (rec.games.frp.gurps)
Loading